Jaguar E-Pace
Car comparison
Jaguar E-Pace 2.0 P300vsLand Rover Range Rover Velar P 340 3.0 V6
Compare specs, acceleration, fuel consumption, dimensions, practicality, and estimated running costs side by side.
New comparisonLand Rover Range Rover Velar
P 340 3.0 V6
Comparison overview
Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.
Best choices
Jaguar E-Pace 2.0 P300
- Quickest 0-100 km/h6.4 s
- Fastest top speed243 km/h151 mph
- Lightest1,894 kg4,176 lb
- Lowest combined fuel consumption8.0 L/100 km29.4 mpg US35.3 mpg UK
- Lowest CO2 emissions181 g/km
- Largest trunk1,234 L
- Best economy score85/100
- Best practicality score91/100
Land Rover Range Rover Velar P 340 3.0 V6
- Most powerful340 hp254 kW
- Highest torque450 Nm332 lb-ft
- Best power-to-weight174 hp/t130 kW/t5.7 kg/hp
- Best estimated range872 km542 mi
- Best overall score71/100
- Best performance score61/100
Specification comparison
| Model | JaguarE-Pace2.0 P300 | Land RoverRange Rover VelarP 340 3.0 V6 |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 300hp224kW | 340hp254kW |
| Torque | 400Nm295lb-ft | 450Nm332lb-ft |
| Curb weight | 1,894kg4,176lb | 1,954kg4,308lb |
| Gross weight | 2,400kg5,291lb | - |
| Top speed | 243 km/h 151 mph | 233 km/h 145 mph |
| To 99% top speed | 85.2s99% target: 241 km/h / 149 mph Calculated | 77.4s99% target: 231 km/h / 143 mph Calculated |
| 0-100 km/h | 6.4s | 6.4s |
| 0-200 km/h | 26.4s Calculated | 28.1s Calculated |
| 0-60 mph | 6.1s Calculated | 6.1s Calculated |
| Fuel consumption | 8L/100 km29.4mpg US35.3mpg UK | 9.4L/100 km25mpg US30.1mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption city | 9.7L/100 km24.2mpg US29.1mpg UK | - |
| Fuel consumption highway | 7L/100 km33.6mpg US40.4mpg UK | - |
| Quarter mile | 14.5s Calculated | 14.5s Calculated |
| Power-to-weight | 158hp/t118kW/t72hp/1000 lb Calculated | 174hp/t130kW/t79hp/1000 lb Calculated |
| Torque-to-weight | 211Nm/t141lb-ft/ton Calculated | 230Nm/t154lb-ft/ton Calculated |
| Estimated range | 856km532mi Calculated | 872km542mi Calculated |
| Displacement | 1,998cc122cu in | 2,995cc183cu in |
| Length | 4,395mm173in | 4,803mm189in |
| Width | 1,984mm78in | - |
| Height | 1,649mm65in | 1,665mm66in |
| Wheelbase | 2,681mm106in | 2,874mm113in |
| Front track | 1,635mm64in | 1,644mm65in |
| Rear track | 1,634mm64in | 1,663mm65in |
| Ground clearance | 204mm8in | 251mm10in |
| Trunk volume | 1,234L | 673L |
| Max trunk volume | 2,577L | 1,731L |
| Doors | 5 | 5 |
| Seats | 5 | 5 |
| Fuel tank | 69L | 82L |
| CO2 emissions | 181g/km | 214g/km |
Performance charts
Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.
Dyno simulation
Estimated stock-style power and torque curves by engine speed.
- Jaguar E-Pace 2.0 P300: Power / Torque
- Land Rover Range Rover Velar P 340 3.0 V6: Power / Torque
| Vehicle | Peak power RPM | Peak torque RPM | Max engine speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| JaguarE-Pace2.0 P300 | 5,500 rpm | 1,500-4,500 rpm | 5,750 rpm |
| Land RoverRange Rover VelarP 340 3.0 V6 | 6,500 rpm | 4,500 rpm | 6,750 rpm |
Acceleration curve
Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.
| Metric | JaguarE-Pace2.0 P300 | Land RoverRange Rover VelarP 340 3.0 V6 |
|---|---|---|
| Acceleration checkpoints | ||
0-60 mph 0-97 km/h | 6.1 s | 6.1 s |
0-100 km/h 0-62 mph | 6.4 s | 6.4 s |
0-200 km/h 0-124 mph | 26.4 s | 28.1 s |
| Top speed | 243 km/h 151 mph | 233 km/h 145 mph |
| Drag race simulation | ||
60 ft 18 m | 2.3 s | 2.3 s |
330 ft 101 m | 6.3 s | 6.3 s |
1/8 mile 201 m | 9.4 s | 9.4 s |
1000 ft 305 m | 12.2 s | 12.2 s |
1/4 mile 402 m | 14.5 s | 14.5 s |
Trap speed 1/4 mile 402 m | 158 km/h 98 mph | 157 km/h 98 mph |
Power comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power. Higher is better · hp / kW
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| JaguarE-Pace2.0 P300 | 300 hp 224 kW |
| Land RoverRange Rover VelarP 340 3.0 V6 | 340 hp 254 kW |
Land Rover Range Rover Velar P 340 3.0 V6 has 40 hp more than Jaguar E-Pace 2.0 P300.
The biggest power difference is between Jaguar E-Pace 2.0 P300 and Land Rover Range Rover Velar P 340 3.0 V6: 40 hp (30 kW).
Torque comparison
Bar comparison chart for Torque. Higher is better · Nm / lb-ft
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| JaguarE-Pace2.0 P300 | 400 Nm 295 lb-ft |
| Land RoverRange Rover VelarP 340 3.0 V6 | 450 Nm 332 lb-ft |
Curb weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Curb weight. Lower is better · kg / lb
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| JaguarE-Pace2.0 P300 | 1,894 kg 4,176 lb |
| Land RoverRange Rover VelarP 340 3.0 V6 | 1,954 kg 4,308 lb |
Top speed without limiter comparison
Bar comparison chart for Top speed without limiter. Higher is better · km/h / mph
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| JaguarE-Pace2.0 P300 | 243 km/h 151 mph |
| Land RoverRange Rover VelarP 340 3.0 V6 | 233 km/h 145 mph |
0-100 km/h comparison
Bar comparison chart for 0-100 km/h. Lower is better · seconds
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| JaguarE-Pace2.0 P300 | 6.4 s |
| Land RoverRange Rover VelarP 340 3.0 V6 | 6.4 s |
Although Land Rover Range Rover Velar P 340 3.0 V6 has more power, Jaguar E-Pace 2.0 P300 is quicker from 0-100 km/h.
Fuel consumption comparison
Bar comparison chart for Fuel consumption. Lower is better · L/100 km / mpg US / mpg UK
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| JaguarE-Pace2.0 P300 | 8.0 L/100 km 29.4 mpg US 35.3 mpg UK |
| Land RoverRange Rover VelarP 340 3.0 V6 | 9.4 L/100 km 25.0 mpg US 30.1 mpg UK |
The biggest fuel consumption difference is between Jaguar E-Pace 2.0 P300 and Land Rover Range Rover Velar P 340 3.0 V6: 1.4 L/100 km.
Power-to-weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power-to-weight. Higher is better · hp/t / kW/t
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| JaguarE-Pace2.0 P300 | 158 hp/t 118 kW/t 6.3 kg/hp |
| Land RoverRange Rover VelarP 340 3.0 V6 | 174 hp/t 130 kW/t 5.7 kg/hp |
Estimated range comparison
Bar comparison chart for Estimated range. Higher is better · km / mi
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| JaguarE-Pace2.0 P300 | 856 km 532 mi |
| Land RoverRange Rover VelarP 340 3.0 V6 | 872 km 542 mi |
Performance spider chart
Radar chart comparing normalized performance and fuel-consumption scores.
| Vehicle | Power | Acceleration | Top speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| JaguarE-Pace2.0 P300 | 300 hp 224 kW | 6.4 s | 243 km/h 151 mph |
| Land RoverRange Rover VelarP 340 3.0 V6 | 340 hp 254 kW | 6.4 s | 233 km/h 145 mph |
Most attractive quadrant
Scatter chart with performance score on the X axis and practicality score on the Y axis.
| Vehicle | Performance score | Practicality score | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| JaguarE-Pace2.0 P300 |
|
| ||||||||||||||
| Land RoverRange Rover VelarP 340 3.0 V6 |
|
| ||||||||||||||
Performance vs fuel economy
Cars closer to the top-right corner combine stronger performance with better fuel economy scores.
| Vehicle | Performance score | Fuel economy score | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| JaguarE-Pace2.0 P300 |
| 8.0 L/100 km 29.4 mpg US 35.3 mpg UK | ||||||
| Land RoverRange Rover VelarP 340 3.0 V6 |
| 9.4 L/100 km 25.0 mpg US 30.1 mpg UK | ||||||
Land Rover Range Rover Velar P 340 3.0 V6 is closest to the top-right balance target for performance and fuel economy.
Acceleration vs fuel consumption
Cars closer to the lower-left corner offer a better mix of quick acceleration and low fuel consumption.
| Vehicle | Fuel consumption, L/100 km | 0-100 km/h, s |
|---|---|---|
| JaguarE-Pace2.0 P300 | 8.0 L/100 km 29.4 mpg US 35.3 mpg UK | 6.4 s |
| Land RoverRange Rover VelarP 340 3.0 V6 | 9.4 L/100 km 25.0 mpg US 30.1 mpg UK | 6.4 s |
Power-to-weight vs fuel consumption
The shaded area favors higher power-to-weight with lower combined fuel consumption.
| Vehicle | Power-to-weight, hp/t | Fuel consumption, L/100 km |
|---|---|---|
| JaguarE-Pace2.0 P300 | 158 hp/t 118 kW/t 6.3 kg/hp | 8.0 L/100 km 29.4 mpg US 35.3 mpg UK |
| Land RoverRange Rover VelarP 340 3.0 V6 | 174 hp/t 130 kW/t 5.7 kg/hp | 9.4 L/100 km 25.0 mpg US 30.1 mpg UK |
Detailed score breakdown
| Vehicle | JaguarE-Pace2.0 P300 | Land RoverRange Rover VelarP 340 3.0 V6 | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power | 300 hp 224 kW | 340 hp 254 kW | ||||||||||||||||
| Torque | 400 Nm 295 lb-ft | 450 Nm 332 lb-ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Acceleration | 6.4 s | 6.4 s | ||||||||||||||||
| Top speed | 243 km/h 151 mph | 233 km/h 145 mph | ||||||||||||||||
| Lightness | 1,894 kg 4,176 lb | 1,954 kg 4,308 lb | ||||||||||||||||
| Fuel consumption | 8.0 L/100 km 29.4 mpg US 35.3 mpg UK | 9.4 L/100 km 25.0 mpg US 30.1 mpg UK | ||||||||||||||||
| Practicality |
|
| ||||||||||||||||
| Range score | 856 km 532 mi | 872 km 542 mi | ||||||||||||||||
| CO2 score | 181 g/km | 214 g/km | ||||||||||||||||
| Trunk score | 1,234 L 43.6 cu ft | 673 L 23.8 cu ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Power-to-weight score | 158 hp/t 118 kW/t 6.3 kg/hp | 174 hp/t 130 kW/t 5.7 kg/hp | ||||||||||||||||
| Overall | Fixed score | Fixed score |
Fuel cost and annual usage
Estimate running costs from combined consumption, your annual distance, and the fuel price in your local currency.
Enter the fuel price in your local currency, for example €/L, $/gal, £/L or any other local currency.
LC = Local Currency
| Vehicle | Jaguar E-Pace 2.0 P300 | Land Rover Range Rover Velar P 340 3.0 V6 |
|---|---|---|
| Consumption | 8 L/100 km29.4 mpg US35.3 mpg UK | 9.4 L/100 km25 mpg US30.1 mpg UK |
| Cost / 100 km | 14.00 LC100 km | 16.45 LC100 km |
| Cost / 100 mi | 22.53 LC100 mi | 26.47 LC100 mi |
| Annual fuel used | 1,200 L317 US gal264 UK gal | 1,410 L372 US gal310 UK gal |
| Annual fuel cost | 2,100 LC/year | 2,468 LC/year |
Head-to-head comparisons
Jaguar E-Pace 2.0 P300
- Is 60 kg lighter
- Has 10 km/h (6 mph) higher top speed
- Uses 1.4 L/100 km less fuel
- Has 561 L more trunk volume
- Emits 33 g/km less CO2
Pros
- Quickest 0-100 km/h in this comparison
- Highest top speed
- Lightest
- Lowest combined fuel consumption
- Largest trunk
Cons
- Lowest power
Land Rover Range Rover Velar P 340 3.0 V6
- Has 40 hp more
- Has 50 Nm more
- Has 16 hp/t better power-to-weight
- Has 16 km (10 mi) more estimated range
Pros
- Most powerful
- Highest torque
- Best power-to-weight ratio
- Best estimated range
Cons
- Highest combined fuel consumption
- Heaviest
- Lowest top speed
- Smallest trunk
- Highest CO2 emissions
Choose cars to compare
Popular comparisons























