2005 Chevrolet TrailBlazer vs. 2009 Land Rover LR2
To start off, 2009 Land Rover LR2 is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2005 Chevrolet TrailBlazer. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2005 Chevrolet TrailBlazer would be higher. At 4,161 cc (6 cylinders), 2005 Chevrolet TrailBlazer is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2005 Chevrolet TrailBlazer (275 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 48 more horse power than 2009 Land Rover LR2. (227 HP @ 6300 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2005 Chevrolet TrailBlazer should accelerate faster than 2009 Land Rover LR2.
Both vehicles are four wheel drive (4WD) - it offers better handling, traction, and control in all driving conditions compared with front wheel drive or rear wheel drive vehicles. 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, 2005 Chevrolet TrailBlazer (373 Nm) has 139 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Land Rover LR2. (234 Nm). This means 2005 Chevrolet TrailBlazer will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Land Rover LR2.
Compare all specifications:
| 2005 Chevrolet TrailBlazer | 2009 Land Rover LR2 | |
| Make | Chevrolet | Land Rover |
| Model | TrailBlazer | LR2 |
| Year Released | 2005 | 2009 |
| Body Type | SUV | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4161 cc | 3192 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 275 HP | 227 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 6300 RPM |
| Torque | 373 Nm | 234 Nm |
| Engine Bore Size | 93 mm | 84 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 102 mm | 96 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 10.0:1 | 10.8:1 |
| Drive Type | 4WD | 4WD |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Width | 1900 mm | 1910 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 11.2 L/100km | 10.4 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 14.7 L/100km | 14.9 L/100km |
