2005 Land Rover LR3 vs. 2012 Holden Commodore
To start off, 2012 Holden Commodore is newer by 7 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2005 Land Rover LR3. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2005 Land Rover LR3 would be higher. At 4,392 cc (8 cylinders), 2005 Land Rover LR3 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2005 Land Rover LR3 (301 HP) has 61 more horse power than 2012 Holden Commodore. (240 HP). In normal driving conditions, 2005 Land Rover LR3 should accelerate faster than 2012 Holden Commodore.
Because 2005 Land Rover LR3 is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2012 Holden Commodore. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2005 Land Rover LR3 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, 2005 Land Rover LR3 (427 Nm) has 187 more torque (in Nm) than 2012 Holden Commodore. (240 Nm). This means 2005 Land Rover LR3 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2012 Holden Commodore.
Compare all specifications:
2005 Land Rover LR3 | 2012 Holden Commodore | |
Make | Land Rover | Holden |
Model | LR3 | Commodore |
Year Released | 2005 | 2012 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 4392 cc | 2564 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Horse Power | 301 HP | 240 HP |
Torque | 427 Nm | 240 Nm |
Drive Type | 4WD | Rear |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 5 doors | 4 doors |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 14.7 L/100km | 10.9 L/100km |