2003 Acura TL vs. 2001 Land Rover Range Rover
To start off, 2003 Acura TL is newer by 2 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2001 Land Rover Range Rover. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2001 Land Rover Range Rover would be higher. At 4,600 cc (8 cylinders), 2001 Land Rover Range Rover is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2003 Acura TL (225 HP) has 3 more horse power than 2001 Land Rover Range Rover. (222 HP). In normal driving conditions, 2003 Acura TL should accelerate faster than 2001 Land Rover Range Rover.
Because 2001 Land Rover Range Rover is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2003 Acura TL. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2001 Land Rover Range Rover will offer significantly more control. With that said, do keep in mind that many other factors such as speed and the wear on your tires can also have significant impact on traction and control. Let's talk about torque, 2001 Land Rover Range Rover (407 Nm) has 113 more torque (in Nm) than 2003 Acura TL. (294 Nm). This means 2001 Land Rover Range Rover will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2003 Acura TL.
Compare all specifications:
2003 Acura TL | 2001 Land Rover Range Rover | |
Make | Acura | Land Rover |
Model | TL | Range Rover |
Year Released | 2003 | 2001 |
Body Type | Sedan | SUV |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3210 cc | 4600 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 225 HP | 222 HP |
Torque | 294 Nm | 407 Nm |
Drive Type | Front | 4WD |
Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
Vehicle Length | 4900 mm | 4450 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1800 mm | 1820 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1370 mm | 1800 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2750 mm | 2550 mm |