2006 Ford Ka vs. 2008 Land Rover Range Rover
To start off, 2008 Land Rover Range Rover is newer by 2 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2006 Ford Ka. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2006 Ford Ka would be higher. At 2,926 cc (6 cylinders), 2008 Land Rover Range Rover is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2008 Land Rover Range Rover (176 HP @ 2000 RPM) has 82 more horse power than 2006 Ford Ka. (94 HP @ 5500 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2008 Land Rover Range Rover should accelerate faster than 2006 Ford Ka. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2008 Land Rover Range Rover weights approximately 1360 kg more than 2006 Ford Ka. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 2008 Land Rover Range Rover is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2006 Ford Ka. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2008 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, 2008 Land Rover Range Rover (390 Nm @ 2000 RPM) has 255 more torque (in Nm) than 2006 Ford Ka. (135 Nm @ 4250 RPM). This means 2008 Land Rover Range Rover will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2006 Ford Ka. 2008 Land Rover Range Rover has automatic transmission and 2006 Ford Ka has manual transmission. 2006 Ford Ka will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2008 Land Rover Range Rover will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 2006 Ford Ka | 2008 Land Rover Range Rover | |
| Make | Ford | Land Rover |
| Model | Ka | Range Rover |
| Year Released | 2006 | 2008 |
| Body Type | Convertible | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1599 cc | 2926 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 94 HP | 176 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5500 RPM | 2000 RPM |
| Torque | 135 Nm | 390 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4250 RPM | 2000 RPM |
| Engine Bore Size | 82.1 mm | 84 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 75.5 mm | 88 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 10.0:1 | 18.0:1 |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline - Premium | Diesel |
| Top Speed | 173 km/hour | 179 km/hour |
| Acceleration 0-100mph | 12.1 seconds | 13.6 seconds |
| Drive Type | Front | 4WD |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1140 kg | 2500 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 3660 mm | 4980 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1690 mm | 2200 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1350 mm | 1940 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2460 mm | 2890 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 7.9 L/100km | 11.2 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 40 L | 100 L |
