2009 Land Rover LR2 vs. 2006 Ford Falcon
To start off, 2009 Land Rover LR2 is newer by 3 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2006 Ford Falcon. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2006 Ford Falcon would be higher. At 3,984 cc (6 cylinders), 2006 Ford Falcon is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Land Rover LR2 (227 HP @ 6300 RPM) has 27 more horse power than 2006 Ford Falcon. (200 HP @ 4900 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2009 Land Rover LR2 should accelerate faster than 2006 Ford Falcon.
Because 2009 Land Rover LR2 is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2006 Ford Falcon. 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, 2006 Ford Falcon (357 Nm @ 3000 RPM) has 123 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Land Rover LR2. (234 Nm @ 3200 RPM). This means 2006 Ford Falcon will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Land Rover LR2.
Compare all specifications:
2009 Land Rover LR2 | 2006 Ford Falcon | |
Make | Land Rover | Ford |
Model | LR2 | Falcon |
Year Released | 2009 | 2006 |
Body Type | SUV | Station Wagon |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3192 cc | 3984 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 227 HP | 200 HP |
Engine RPM | 6300 RPM | 4900 RPM |
Torque | 234 Nm | 357 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3200 RPM | 3000 RPM |
Engine Bore Size | 84 mm | 92.4 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 96 mm | 99.3 mm |
Engine Compression Ratio | 10.8:1 | 9.6:1 |
Drive Type | 4WD | Rear |
Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |