2005 Chevrolet Colorado vs. 2008 Land Rover Range Rover Sport
To start off, 2008 Land Rover Range Rover Sport is newer by 3 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2005 Chevrolet Colorado. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2005 Chevrolet Colorado would be higher. At 4,394 cc (8 cylinders), 2008 Land Rover Range Rover Sport is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2008 Land Rover Range Rover Sport weights approximately 809 kg more than 2005 Chevrolet Colorado.
Let's talk about torque, 2008 Land Rover Range Rover Sport (440 Nm) has 189 more torque (in Nm) than 2005 Chevrolet Colorado. (251 Nm). This means 2008 Land Rover Range Rover Sport will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2005 Chevrolet Colorado.
Compare all specifications:
| 2005 Chevrolet Colorado | 2008 Land Rover Range Rover Sport | |
| Make | Chevrolet | Land Rover |
| Model | Colorado | Range Rover Sport |
| Year Released | 2005 | 2008 |
| Body Type | Pickup | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2769 cc | 4394 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 175 HP | 0 HP |
| Torque | 251 Nm | 440 Nm |
| Engine Bore Size | 93 mm | 88.1 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 102 mm | 90.3 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 10.0:1 | 10.5:1 |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1671 kg | 2480 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5270 mm | 4790 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1720 mm | 1930 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1660 mm | 1820 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3210 mm | 2750 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 8.7 L/100km | 11.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 11.8 L/100km | 16.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 10.2 L/100km | 22.2 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 72 L | 88 L |
