2009 Land Rover Range Rover Sport vs. 2010 Chevrolet HHR
To start off, 2010 Chevrolet HHR is newer by 1 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2009 Land Rover Range Rover Sport. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2009 Land Rover Range Rover Sport would be higher. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2009 Land Rover Range Rover Sport weights approximately 624 kg more than 2010 Chevrolet HHR.
Because 2009 Land Rover Range Rover Sport is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2010 Chevrolet HHR. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2009 Land Rover Range Rover Sport 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. 2009 Land Rover Range Rover Sport has automatic transmission and 2010 Chevrolet HHR has manual transmission. 2010 Chevrolet HHR will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2009 Land Rover Range Rover Sport will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 2009 Land Rover Range Rover Sport | 2010 Chevrolet HHR | |
| Make | Land Rover | Chevrolet |
| Model | Range Rover Sport | HHR |
| Year Released | 2009 | 2010 |
| Body Type | SUV | Hatchback |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 155 HP |
| Drive Type | 4WD | Front |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 2055 kg | 1431 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4800 mm | 4475 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1820 mm | 1755 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1930 mm | 1603 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2750 mm | 2629 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 13.1 L/100km | 7.4 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 19.6 L/100km | 10.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 88 L | 61 L |
