Porsche Cayenne III
Car comparison
Porsche Cayenne III 3.0 V6vsLand Rover Range Rover IV · Facelift 2017 4.4 SDV8
Compare specs, acceleration, fuel consumption, dimensions, practicality, and estimated running costs side by side.
New comparisonLand Rover Range Rover IV · Facelift 2017
4.4 SDV8
Comparison overview
Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.
Best choices
Porsche Cayenne III 3.0 V6
- Quickest 0-100 km/h6.2 s
- Fastest top speed245 km/h152 mph
- Most powerful340 hp254 kW
- Lightest1,985 kg4,376 lb
- Best power-to-weight171 hp/t128 kW/t5.8 kg/hp
- Lowest combined fuel consumption9.2 L/100 km25.6 mpg US30.7 mpg UK
- Lowest CO2 emissions209 g/km
- Best overall score72/100
- Best performance score63/100
- Best economy score82/100
- Best practicality score92/100
Land Rover Range Rover IV Facelift 2017 4.4 SDV8
- Highest torque740 Nm546 lb-ft
- Best estimated range925 km575 mi
Specification comparison
| Model | PorscheCayenne III3.0 V6 | Land RoverRange Rover IVFacelift 20174.4 SDV8 |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 340hp254kW | 339hp253kW |
| Torque | 450Nm332lb-ft | 740Nm546lb-ft |
| Curb weight | 1,985kg4,376lb | 2,495kg5,501lb |
| Gross weight | 2,830kg6,239lb | 3,290kg7,253lb |
| Top speed | 245 km/h 152 mph | 217 km/h 135 mph |
| To 99% top speed | 80.1s99% target: 243 km/h / 151 mph Calculated | 98.4s99% target: 215 km/h / 133 mph Calculated |
| 0-100 km/h | 6.2s | 7.3s |
| 0-200 km/h | 24.7s Calculated | 45.7s Calculated |
| 0-60 mph | 5.9s Calculated | 6.9s Calculated |
| Fuel consumption | 9.2L/100 km25.6mpg US30.7mpg UK | 9.3L/100 km25.3mpg US30.4mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption city | 11.3L/100 km20.8mpg US25.0mpg UK | - |
| Fuel consumption highway | 8L/100 km29.4mpg US35.3mpg UK | - |
| Quarter mile | 14.3s Calculated | 15.3s Calculated |
| Power-to-weight | 171hp/t128kW/t78hp/1000 lb Calculated | 136hp/t101kW/t62hp/1000 lb Calculated |
| Torque-to-weight | 227Nm/t152lb-ft/ton Calculated | 297Nm/t198lb-ft/ton Calculated |
| Estimated range | 815km507mi Calculated | 925km575mi Calculated |
| Displacement | 2,995cc183cu in | 4,367cc266cu in |
| Length | 4,918mm194in | 5,000mm197in |
| Width | 1,983mm78in | 2,073mm82in |
| Height | 1,696mm67in | 1,869mm74in |
| Wheelbase | 2,895mm114in | 2,922mm115in |
| Front track | - | 1,693mm67in |
| Rear track | - | 1,685mm66in |
| Ground clearance | - | 297mm12in |
| Trunk volume | 770L | - |
| Max trunk volume | 1,710L | - |
| Doors | 5 | 5 |
| Seats | 5 | 5 |
| Fuel tank | 75L | 86L |
| CO2 emissions | 209g/km | 246g/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.
- Porsche Cayenne III 3.0 V6: Power / Torque
- Land Rover Range Rover IV Facelift 2017 4.4 SDV8: Power / Torque
| Vehicle | Peak power RPM | Peak torque RPM | Max engine speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| PorscheCayenne III3.0 V6 | 5,300-6,400 rpm | 1,340-5,300 rpm | 6,650 rpm |
| Land RoverRange Rover IVFacelift 20174.4 SDV8 | 3,500 rpm | 1,750-2,250 rpm | 3,750 rpm |
Acceleration curve
Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.
| Metric | PorscheCayenne III3.0 V6 | Land RoverRange Rover IVFacelift 20174.4 SDV8 |
|---|---|---|
| Acceleration checkpoints | ||
0-60 mph 0-97 km/h | 5.9 s | 6.9 s |
0-100 km/h 0-62 mph | 6.2 s | 7.3 s |
0-200 km/h 0-124 mph | 24.7 s | 45.7 s |
| Top speed | 245 km/h 152 mph | 217 km/h 135 mph |
| Drag race simulation | ||
60 ft 18 m | 2.3 s | 2.3 s |
330 ft 101 m | 6.2 s | 6.4 s |
1/8 mile 201 m | 9.3 s | 9.8 s |
1000 ft 305 m | 12.0 s | 12.8 s |
1/4 mile 402 m | 14.3 s | 15.3 s |
Trap speed 1/4 mile 402 m | 161 km/h 100 mph | 144 km/h 90 mph |
Power comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power. Higher is better · hp / kW
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| PorscheCayenne III3.0 V6 | 340 hp 254 kW |
| Land RoverRange Rover IVFacelift 20174.4 SDV8 | 339 hp 253 kW |
Porsche Cayenne III 3.0 V6 has 1 hp more than Land Rover Range Rover IV Facelift 2017 4.4 SDV8.
The biggest power difference is between Land Rover Range Rover IV Facelift 2017 4.4 SDV8 and Porsche Cayenne III 3.0 V6: 1 hp (1 kW).
Torque comparison
Bar comparison chart for Torque. Higher is better · Nm / lb-ft
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| PorscheCayenne III3.0 V6 | 450 Nm 332 lb-ft |
| Land RoverRange Rover IVFacelift 20174.4 SDV8 | 740 Nm 546 lb-ft |
Curb weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Curb weight. Lower is better · kg / lb
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| PorscheCayenne III3.0 V6 | 1,985 kg 4,376 lb |
| Land RoverRange Rover IVFacelift 20174.4 SDV8 | 2,495 kg 5,501 lb |
Top speed without limiter comparison
Bar comparison chart for Top speed without limiter. Higher is better · km/h / mph
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| PorscheCayenne III3.0 V6 | 245 km/h 152 mph |
| Land RoverRange Rover IVFacelift 20174.4 SDV8 | 217 km/h 135 mph |
0-100 km/h comparison
Bar comparison chart for 0-100 km/h. Lower is better · seconds
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| PorscheCayenne III3.0 V6 | 6.2 s |
| Land RoverRange Rover IVFacelift 20174.4 SDV8 | 7.3 s |
The biggest 0-100 km/h difference is between Porsche Cayenne III 3.0 V6 and Land Rover Range Rover IV Facelift 2017 4.4 SDV8: 1.1 s.
Fuel consumption comparison
Bar comparison chart for Fuel consumption. Lower is better · L/100 km / mpg US / mpg UK
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| PorscheCayenne III3.0 V6 | 9.2 L/100 km 25.6 mpg US 30.7 mpg UK |
| Land RoverRange Rover IVFacelift 20174.4 SDV8 | 9.3 L/100 km 25.3 mpg US 30.4 mpg UK |
Power-to-weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power-to-weight. Higher is better · hp/t / kW/t
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| PorscheCayenne III3.0 V6 | 171 hp/t 128 kW/t 5.8 kg/hp |
| Land RoverRange Rover IVFacelift 20174.4 SDV8 | 136 hp/t 101 kW/t 7.4 kg/hp |
Estimated range comparison
Bar comparison chart for Estimated range. Higher is better · km / mi
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| PorscheCayenne III3.0 V6 | 815 km 507 mi |
| Land RoverRange Rover IVFacelift 20174.4 SDV8 | 925 km 575 mi |
Performance spider chart
Radar chart comparing normalized performance and fuel-consumption scores.
| Vehicle | Power | Acceleration | Top speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| PorscheCayenne III3.0 V6 | 340 hp 254 kW | 6.2 s | 245 km/h 152 mph |
| Land RoverRange Rover IVFacelift 20174.4 SDV8 | 339 hp 253 kW | 7.3 s | 217 km/h 135 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 | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PorscheCayenne III3.0 V6 |
|
| ||||||||||||||
| Land RoverRange Rover IVFacelift 20174.4 SDV8 |
|
| ||||||||||||||
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 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PorscheCayenne III3.0 V6 |
| 9.2 L/100 km 25.6 mpg US 30.7 mpg UK | ||||||
| Land RoverRange Rover IVFacelift 20174.4 SDV8 |
| 9.3 L/100 km 25.3 mpg US 30.4 mpg UK | ||||||
Porsche Cayenne III 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 |
|---|---|---|
| PorscheCayenne III3.0 V6 | 9.2 L/100 km 25.6 mpg US 30.7 mpg UK | 6.2 s |
| Land RoverRange Rover IVFacelift 20174.4 SDV8 | 9.3 L/100 km 25.3 mpg US 30.4 mpg UK | 7.3 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 |
|---|---|---|
| PorscheCayenne III3.0 V6 | 171 hp/t 128 kW/t 5.8 kg/hp | 9.2 L/100 km 25.6 mpg US 30.7 mpg UK |
| Land RoverRange Rover IVFacelift 20174.4 SDV8 | 136 hp/t 101 kW/t 7.4 kg/hp | 9.3 L/100 km 25.3 mpg US 30.4 mpg UK |
Detailed score breakdown
| Vehicle | PorscheCayenne III3.0 V6 | Land RoverRange Rover IVFacelift 20174.4 SDV8 | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power | 340 hp 254 kW | 339 hp 253 kW | ||||||||||||||||
| Torque | 450 Nm 332 lb-ft | 740 Nm 546 lb-ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Acceleration | 6.2 s | 7.3 s | ||||||||||||||||
| Top speed | 245 km/h 152 mph | 217 km/h 135 mph | ||||||||||||||||
| Lightness | 1,985 kg 4,376 lb | 2,495 kg 5,501 lb | ||||||||||||||||
| Fuel consumption | 9.2 L/100 km 25.6 mpg US 30.7 mpg UK | 9.3 L/100 km 25.3 mpg US 30.4 mpg UK | ||||||||||||||||
| Practicality |
|
| ||||||||||||||||
| Range score | 815 km 507 mi | 925 km 575 mi | ||||||||||||||||
| CO2 score | 209 g/km | 246 g/km | ||||||||||||||||
| Trunk score | 770 L 27.2 cu ft | - | ||||||||||||||||
| Power-to-weight score | 171 hp/t 128 kW/t 5.8 kg/hp | 136 hp/t 101 kW/t 7.4 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 | Porsche Cayenne III 3.0 V6 | Land Rover Range Rover IV Facelift 2017 4.4 SDV8 |
|---|---|---|
| Consumption | 9.2 L/100 km25.6 mpg US30.7 mpg UK | 9.3 L/100 km25.3 mpg US30.4 mpg UK |
| Cost / 100 km | 16.10 LC100 km | 16.28 LC100 km |
| Cost / 100 mi | 25.91 LC100 mi | 26.19 LC100 mi |
| Annual fuel used | 1,380 L365 US gal304 UK gal | 1,395 L369 US gal307 UK gal |
| Annual fuel cost | 2,415 LC/year | 2,441 LC/year |
Head-to-head comparisons
Porsche Cayenne III 3.0 V6
- Has 1 hp more
- Is 510 kg lighter
- Is 1.1 s quicker from 0-100 km/h
- Has 28 km/h (17 mph) higher top speed
- Uses 0.1 L/100 km less fuel
- Has 35 hp/t better power-to-weight
- Emits 37 g/km less CO2
Pros
- Quickest 0-100 km/h in this comparison
- Highest top speed
- Most powerful
- Lightest
- Lowest combined fuel consumption
- Best power-to-weight ratio
Land Rover Range Rover IV Facelift 2017 4.4 SDV8
- Has 290 Nm more
- Has 110 km (68 mi) more estimated range
Pros
- Highest torque
- Best estimated range
Cons
- Slowest 0-100 km/h
- Lowest power
- Highest combined fuel consumption
- Heaviest
- Lowest top speed
- Highest CO2 emissions
Choose cars to compare
Popular comparisons























