2005 Chrysler 300 vs. 2002 Land Rover Range Rover
To start off, 2005 Chrysler 300 is newer by 3 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2002 Land Rover Range Rover. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2002 Land Rover Range Rover would be higher. At 5,653 cc (8 cylinders), 2005 Chrysler 300 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2005 Chrysler 300 (340 HP) has 58 more horse power than 2002 Land Rover Range Rover. (282 HP). In normal driving conditions, 2005 Chrysler 300 should accelerate faster than 2002 Land Rover Range Rover. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2002 Land Rover Range Rover weights approximately 605 kg more than 2005 Chrysler 300.
Let's talk about torque, 2005 Chrysler 300 (529 Nm) has 90 more torque (in Nm) than 2002 Land Rover Range Rover. (439 Nm). This means 2005 Chrysler 300 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2002 Land Rover Range Rover.
Compare all specifications:
| 2005 Chrysler 300 | 2002 Land Rover Range Rover | |
| Make | Chrysler | Land Rover |
| Model | 300 | Range Rover |
| Year Released | 2005 | 2002 |
| Body Type | Sedan | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 5653 cc | 4398 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 340 HP | 282 HP |
| Torque | 529 Nm | 439 Nm |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 1835 kg | 2440 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5010 mm | 4450 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1890 mm | 1820 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1490 mm | 1800 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3050 mm | 2550 mm |
