2004 Land Rover Range Rover vs. 2010 Lexus RX
To start off, 2010 Lexus RX is newer by 6 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 4,398 cc (8 cylinders), 2004 Land Rover Range Rover is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2010 Lexus RX (295 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 13 more horse power than 2004 Land Rover Range Rover. (282 HP @ 5400 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Lexus RX should accelerate faster than 2004 Land Rover Range Rover. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2004 Land Rover Range Rover weights approximately 465 kg more than 2010 Lexus RX.
Because 2004 Land Rover Range Rover is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2010 Lexus RX. 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.
Compare all specifications:
2004 Land Rover Range Rover | 2010 Lexus RX | |
Make | Land Rover | Lexus |
Model | Range Rover | RX |
Year Released | 2004 | 2010 |
Body Type | SUV | SUV |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 4398 cc | 3500 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 282 HP | 295 HP |
Engine RPM | 5400 RPM | 6000 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | 4WD | Front |
Transmission Type | Automatic | CVT |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 5 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 2515 kg | 2050 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4960 mm | 4770 mm |
Vehicle Width | 2200 mm | 1885 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1870 mm | 1684 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2890 mm | 2741 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 100 L | 73 L |