2006 Holden Commodore vs. 1996 Land Rover Range Rover
To start off, 2006 Holden Commodore is newer by 10 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1996 Land Rover Range Rover. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1996 Land Rover Range Rover would be higher. At 5,976 cc (8 cylinders), 2006 Holden Commodore is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Holden Commodore (360 HP) has 172 more horse power than 1996 Land Rover Range Rover. (188 HP). In normal driving conditions, 2006 Holden Commodore should accelerate faster than 1996 Land Rover Range Rover.
Because 1996 Land Rover Range Rover is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2006 Holden Commodore. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1996 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, 1996 Land Rover Range Rover (320 Nm) has 30 more torque (in Nm) than 2006 Holden Commodore. (290 Nm). This means 1996 Land Rover Range Rover will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2006 Holden Commodore.
Compare all specifications:
| 2006 Holden Commodore | 1996 Land Rover Range Rover | |
| Make | Holden | Land Rover |
| Model | Commodore | Range Rover |
| Year Released | 2006 | 1996 |
| Body Type | Sedan | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 5976 cc | 3946 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 360 HP | 188 HP |
| Torque | 290 Nm | 320 Nm |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
