2009 Land Rover LR2 vs. 2005 Toyota Celica
To start off, 2009 Land Rover LR2 is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2005 Toyota Celica. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2005 Toyota Celica would be higher. At 3,192 cc (6 cylinders), 2009 Land Rover LR2 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Land Rover LR2 (227 HP @ 6300 RPM) has 47 more horse power than 2005 Toyota Celica. (180 HP @ 5300 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2009 Land Rover LR2 should accelerate faster than 2005 Toyota Celica.
Because 2009 Land Rover LR2 is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2005 Toyota Celica. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2009 Land Rover LR2 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, 2009 Land Rover LR2 (234 Nm) has 58 more torque (in Nm) than 2005 Toyota Celica. (176 Nm). This means 2009 Land Rover LR2 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2005 Toyota Celica.
Compare all specifications:
| 2009 Land Rover LR2 | 2005 Toyota Celica | |
| Make | Land Rover | Toyota |
| Model | LR2 | Celica |
| Year Released | 2009 | 2005 |
| Body Type | SUV | Coupe |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3192 cc | 1803 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 227 HP | 180 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6300 RPM | 5300 RPM |
| Torque | 234 Nm | 176 Nm |
| Engine Bore Size | 84 mm | 82 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 96 mm | 85 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 10.8:1 | 11.5:1 |
| Drive Type | 4WD | Front |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Width | 1910 mm | 1740 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 10.4 L/100km | 7.1 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 14.9 L/100km | 9.8 L/100km |
