DETAILED CAR COMPARISON

2000 Land Rover Range Rover vs 2000 Ford Econoline Comparison

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

VS
WINNER

Ford Econoline

Leads the overall E-Kıyasla score by 0.25 points.

67.5–67.75
SPECIFICATION GROUPS

Every difference between the two cars

Basic Specifications

Land RoverMakeFord
Range RoverModelEconoline
2000Model year2000
EstateBody typeMinivan
5Seats8
5Doors4

Performance

10,5 s0–100 km/h—
190 km/hTop speed0 km/h
3947 ccEngine displacement4192 cc
185 HPPower193 HP
340 NmTorque331 Nm
8Cylinders6

Fuel & Consumption

PetrolFuel typePetrol
100 ltFuel tank132 lt
22,5 ltUrban consumption16,8 lt
12,6 ltExtra-urban consumption13,1 lt

Transmission & Chassis

4x4DrivetrainRear-wheel drive
5Gears4
235/70R16Tyre size235/75 R15
YesABSYes

Dimensions

4713 mmLength5382 mm
1853 mmWidth2014 mm
1853 mmHeight2050 mm
2120 KgWeight2370 Kg
2745 mmWheelbase3505 mm

E-Kıyasla Editor’s Note

2000 Land Rover Range Rover and 2000 Ford Econoline 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, Ford Econoline 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…