2004 Land Rover Range Rover vs. 2012 Holden UTE
To start off, 2012 Holden UTE is newer by 8 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 6,000 cc (8 cylinders), 2012 Holden UTE is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2012 Holden UTE (357 HP) has 75 more horse power than 2004 Land Rover Range Rover. (282 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2012 Holden UTE should accelerate faster than 2004 Land Rover Range Rover.
Because 2004 Land Rover Range Rover is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2012 Holden UTE. 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, 2012 Holden UTE (530 Nm) has 89 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 Land Rover Range Rover. (441 Nm). This means 2012 Holden UTE will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 Land Rover Range Rover.
Compare all specifications:
2004 Land Rover Range Rover | 2012 Holden UTE | |
Make | Land Rover | Holden |
Model | Range Rover | UTE |
Year Released | 2004 | 2012 |
Body Type | SUV | Pickup |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 4392 cc | 6000 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Horse Power | 282 HP | 357 HP |
Torque | 441 Nm | 530 Nm |
Drive Type | 4WD | Rear |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 2 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |