DETAILED CAR COMPARISON

1996 Mazda Proceed vs 1996 Land Rover Range Rover 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.

61.5–61.25
SPECIFICATION GROUPS

Every difference between the two cars

Basic Specifications

MazdaMakeLand Rover
ProceedModelRange Rover
1996Model year1996
Off-road vehicleBody typeEstate
7Seats5
5Doors5

Performance

—0–100 km/h14,3 s
0 km/hTop speed185 km/h
2499 ccEngine displacement2497 cc
125 HPPower136 HP
294 NmTorque270 Nm
4Cylinders6

Fuel & Consumption

DieselFuel typeDiesel
70 ltFuel tank100 lt
—Urban consumption12,8 lt
—Extra-urban consumption8,9 lt
—Average consumption10,6 lt

Transmission & Chassis

4x4Drivetrain4x4
4Gears5
265/70 R15Tyre size235/70 R16
—ABSYes

Dimensions

4990 mmLength4713 mm
1810 mmWidth1853 mm
1815 mmHeight1817 mm
1830 KgWeight2115 Kg
3000 mmWheelbase2745 mm

E-Kıyasla Editor’s Note

1996 Mazda Proceed and 1996 Land Rover Range Rover 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…