2008 Land Rover Range Rover vs. 1996 Acura TL
To start off, 2008 Land Rover Range Rover is newer by 12 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1996 Acura TL. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1996 Acura TL would be higher. At 3,200 cc (6 cylinders), 1996 Acura TL is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1996 Acura TL (200 HP) has 24 more horse power than 2008 Land Rover Range Rover. (176 HP) In normal driving conditions, 1996 Acura TL should accelerate faster than 2008 Land Rover Range Rover.
Because 2008 Land Rover Range Rover is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1996 Acura TL. 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.
Compare all specifications:
2008 Land Rover Range Rover | 1996 Acura TL | |
Make | Land Rover | Acura |
Model | Range Rover | TL |
Year Released | 2008 | 1996 |
Body Type | SUV | Sedan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2926 cc | 3200 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 176 HP | 200 HP |
Fuel Type | Diesel | Gasoline |
Drive Type | 4WD | Front |
Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4980 mm | 4864 mm |
Vehicle Width | 2200 mm | 1786 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1940 mm | 1405 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2890 mm | 2840 mm |