2008 Land Rover Range Rover vs. 2012 BMW 640
To start off, 2012 BMW 640 is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2008 Land Rover Range Rover. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2008 Land Rover Range Rover would be higher. At 3,628 cc (8 cylinders), 2008 Land Rover Range Rover is equipped with a bigger engine.
Because 2008 Land Rover Range Rover is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2012 BMW 640. 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 | 2012 BMW 640 | |
| Make | Land Rover | BMW |
| Model | Range Rover | 640 |
| Year Released | 2008 | 2012 |
| Body Type | SUV | Coupe |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3628 cc | 2979 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 0 HP |
| Engine Bore Size | 81 mm | 89.6 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 88 mm | 84 mm |
| Fuel Type | Diesel | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | 4WD | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | 8-speed shiftable automatic |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4980 mm | 4894 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1820 mm | 1369 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2890 mm | 2855 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 105 L | 70 L |
