2004 Land Rover Range Rover vs. 2008 Volvo S60
To start off, 2008 Volvo S60 is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Land Rover Range Rover. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Land Rover Range Rover would be higher. At 4,392 cc (8 cylinders), 2004 Land Rover Range Rover is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2004 Land Rover Range Rover weights approximately 939 kg more than 2008 Volvo S60.
Because 2004 Land Rover Range Rover is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2008 Volvo S60. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2004 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, 2004 Land Rover Range Rover (441 Nm) has 211 more torque (in Nm) than 2008 Volvo S60. (230 Nm). This means 2004 Land Rover Range Rover will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2008 Volvo S60.
Compare all specifications:
2004 Land Rover Range Rover | 2008 Volvo S60 | |
Make | Land Rover | Volvo |
Model | Range Rover | S60 |
Year Released | 2004 | 2008 |
Body Type | SUV | Sedan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 4392 cc | 2433 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 5 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 282 HP | 0 HP |
Torque | 441 Nm | 230 Nm |
Engine Compression Ratio | 10.0:1 | 10.3:1 |
Drive Type | 4WD | Front |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 2440 kg | 1501 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4960 mm | 4580 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1870 mm | 1430 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2890 mm | 2720 mm |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 18.1 L/100km | 9 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 100 L | 70 L |