2005 Cadillac XLR vs. 2009 Land Rover Range Rover
To start off, 2009 Land Rover Range Rover is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2005 Cadillac XLR. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2005 Cadillac XLR would be higher. At 4,565 cc (8 cylinders), 2005 Cadillac XLR is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Land Rover Range Rover (400 HP @ 5750 RPM) has 80 more horse power than 2005 Cadillac XLR. (320 HP @ 6000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Land Rover Range Rover should accelerate faster than 2005 Cadillac XLR. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2009 Land Rover Range Rover weights approximately 631 kg more than 2005 Cadillac XLR. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 2009 Land Rover Range Rover is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2005 Cadillac XLR. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2009 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, 2009 Land Rover Range Rover (570 Nm @ 3500 RPM) has 170 more torque (in Nm) than 2005 Cadillac XLR. (400 Nm @ 4400 RPM). This means 2009 Land Rover Range Rover will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2005 Cadillac XLR.
Compare all specifications:
| 2005 Cadillac XLR | 2009 Land Rover Range Rover | |
| Make | Cadillac | Land Rover |
| Model | XLR | Range Rover |
| Year Released | 2005 | 2009 |
| Body Type | Convertible | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4565 cc | 4197 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 320 HP | 400 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 5750 RPM |
| Torque | 400 Nm | 570 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4400 RPM | 3500 RPM |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 10.5:1 | 9.1:1 |
| Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
| Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1655 kg | 2286 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4520 mm | 4980 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1840 mm | 1960 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1290 mm | 1910 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2690 mm | 2890 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 9.4 L/100km | 13.1 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 13.8 L/100km | 19.6 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 12.4 L/100km | 16.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 68 L | 104 L |
