2005 Land Rover Range Rover 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 Range Rover. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2005 Land Rover Range Rover would be higher. At 5,976 cc (8 cylinders), 2012 Holden Commodore is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2012 Holden Commodore (360 HP) has 77 more horse power than 2005 Land Rover Range Rover. (283 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2012 Holden Commodore should accelerate faster than 2005 Land Rover Range Rover.
Because 2005 Land Rover Range Rover 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 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, 2005 Land Rover Range Rover (441 Nm) has 151 more torque (in Nm) than 2012 Holden Commodore. (290 Nm). This means 2005 Land Rover Range Rover will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2012 Holden Commodore.
Compare all specifications:
| 2005 Land Rover Range Rover | 2012 Holden Commodore | |
| Make | Land Rover | Holden |
| Model | Range Rover | Commodore |
| Year Released | 2005 | 2012 |
| Body Type | SUV | Station Wagon |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4392 cc | 5976 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Horse Power | 283 HP | 360 HP |
| Torque | 441 Nm | 290 Nm |
| Drive Type | 4WD | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
