2006 Land Rover LR3 vs. 2011 Ford E-250
To start off, 2011 Ford E-250 is newer by 5 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2006 Land Rover LR3. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2006 Land Rover LR3 would be higher. At 4,600 cc (8 cylinders), 2011 Ford E-250 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2011 Ford E-250 (225 HP @ 4800 RPM) has 9 more horse power than 2006 Land Rover LR3. (216 HP @ 4500 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2011 Ford E-250 should accelerate faster than 2006 Land Rover LR3.
Because 2006 Land Rover LR3 is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2011 Ford E-250. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2006 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, 2011 Ford E-250 (387 Nm @ 3500 RPM) has 22 more torque (in Nm) than 2006 Land Rover LR3. (365 Nm @ 3000 RPM). This means 2011 Ford E-250 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2006 Land Rover LR3.
Compare all specifications:
| 2006 Land Rover LR3 | 2011 Ford E-250 | |
| Make | Land Rover | Ford |
| Model | LR3 | E-250 |
| Year Released | 2006 | 2011 |
| Body Type | SUV | Van |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4015 cc | 4600 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Horse Power | 216 HP | 225 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4500 RPM | 4800 RPM |
| Torque | 365 Nm | 387 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3000 RPM | 3500 RPM |
| Drive Type | 4WD | Rear |
| Vehicle Length | 4860 mm | 5504 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1920 mm | 2017 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1900 mm | 2154 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2890 mm | 3505 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 12.4 L/100km | 13.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 16.8 L/100km | 18.1 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 86 L | 125 L |
