DETAILED CAR COMPARISON

1996 Land Rover Range Rover vs 1996 Mazda Proceed Comparison

Compare technical specifications, scores and everyday-use differences side by side.

VS
WINNER

Mazda Proceed

Leads the overall E-Kıyasla score by 0.25 points.

61.25–61.5
SPECIFICATION GROUPS

Every difference between the two cars

Basic Specifications

Land RoverMakeMazda
Range RoverModelProceed
1996Model year1996
EstateBody typeOff-road vehicle
5Seats7
5Doors5

Performance

14,3 s0–100 km/h—
185 km/hTop speed0 km/h
2497 ccEngine displacement2499 cc
136 HPPower125 HP
270 NmTorque294 Nm
6Cylinders4

Fuel & Consumption

DieselFuel typeDiesel
100 ltFuel tank70 lt
12,8 ltUrban consumption—
8,9 ltExtra-urban consumption—
10,6 ltAverage consumption—

Transmission & Chassis

4x4Drivetrain4x4
5Gears4
235/70 R16Tyre size265/70 R15
YesABS—

Dimensions

4713 mmLength4990 mm
1853 mmWidth1810 mm
1817 mmHeight1815 mm
2115 KgWeight1830 Kg
2745 mmWheelbase3000 mm

E-Kıyasla Editor’s Note

1996 Land Rover Range Rover and 1996 Mazda Proceed approach the same decision from different angles. We compare the exact versions so changes in engine, transmission, dimensions and equipment are not hidden behind the model names.

Overall, Mazda Proceed leads the E-Kıyasla score by 0.25 points. The score provides a consistent summary, while the best choice can still change with priorities such as urban efficiency, luggage space, performance or equipment.

SIMILAR COMPARISONS

Similar comparisons

Explore related comparisons featuring cars from this matchup.

Comments are loading…