BMW X5 (2013) vs. Land Rover Range Rover Evoque (2013) Specs

vs.

◆

2013 BMW X5 and 2013 Land Rover Range Rover Evoque Specifications

Model Year	2013	2013
Model	BMW X5	Land Rover Range Rover Evoque
Engine
Transmission
Drivetrain
Body	4dr SUV	4dr SUV
			Difference
Wheelbase	115.5 in	104.8 in	10.7 in
Length	191.2 in	171.5 in	19.7 in
Width	76.1 in	77.4 in	-1.3 in
Height	69.9 in	64.4 in	5.5 in
Curb Weight	4960 lb.	3680 lb.	1280 lb.
Fuel Capacity	22.5 gal.	18.5 gal.	4 gal.
Headroom, Row 1	39.3 in	40.3 in	-1 in
Shoulder Room, Row 1	60.0 in	56.6 in	3.4 in
Legroom, Row 1	40.0 in	43.1 in	-3.1 in
Headroom, Row 2	39.0 in	39.7 in	-0.7 in
Shoulder Room, Row 2	58.0 in	55.4 in	2.6 in
Legroom, Row 2	36.6 in	35.7 in	0.9 in
Total Legroom	76.6 in (over 2 rows)	78.8 in (over 2 rows)	-2.2 in
Cargo Volume, Minimum	7.1 ft³	20.3 ft³	-13.2 ft³
Cargo Volume, Behind R2	21.9 ft³	20.3	1.6 ft³
Cargo Volume, Maximum	61.8 ft³	51.0 ft³	10.8 ft³

2013 BMW X5 Seat Room and Comfort: Pros
Year	Comment
2014	BMW's multicontour seats, a $1,300 option on six-cylinder X5s and standard with the V8, deliver a rarely matched combination of support in turns and comfort on long drives. In a reversal of traditional tendencies, the buckets in the Range Rover Sport feel firmer and less comfortable. Though you'll find a commanding view forward in either driver seat, the Range Rover Sport maintains an edge in this area. Unusually large windows are one thing that makes a Land Rover a Land Rover. see full BMW X5 review

2013 BMW X5 Seat Room and Comfort: Cons
Year	Comment
	Audi and Mercedes both offer much longer SUVs. At least until BMW fields an X7, the X5 is available with an optional third-row seat. Especially considering the size and price of the X5, said third row is absurdly tight, thinly upholstered, and difficult to access. The door openings are small, and the entire second row seat pivots forward and upward off the floor in an only partially successful attempt to compensate. To provide even minimal legroom for those using it, the second row must slide forward a few inches, to the point that its occupants find their own legroom severely compromised. Both rows are too low to the floor for adult comfort. The third-row seat optional in the Range Rover Sport probably isn't much better, and deletes the spare tire (not available on the BMW regardless). This might explain why it wasn't on the tested vehicle. If you want a usable third row, Land Rover offers the less stylish, but also much less expensive and roomier LR4. Shift focus to the second-row seat, and I found that in the smaller X3 at least as comfortable, and easier to get into and out of thanks to the more compact vehicle's lower ride height. That in the Range Rover Sport, though also not the roomiest or the most comfortable, is better than the X5's. see full BMW X5 review

None of our members have yet commented on the seat room and comfort of the 2013 BMW X5.

2013 Land Rover Range Rover Evoque Seat Room and Comfort: Cons
Year	Comment
	When I first drove an Evoque, I found its front seats cushier and more comfortable than those in the X1. But that was for a short test drive. With more seat time later, the seat felt overly firm beneath my bum and the left seat cushion bolster pressed uncomfortably into my thigh. We're all shaped differently, and we sit differently as well, so your impressions may vary. As with any car, try to get as much seat time as you can before buying--few things are harder than seat comfort to evaluate during a test drive. see full Land Rover Range Rover Evoque review

2013 Land Rover Range Rover Evoque Seat Room and Comfort: Pros
Year	Body/Powertrain	Comment
2012	4dr SUV turbocharged 240hp 2.0L I4 6-speed shiftable automatic AWD	Astonishingly, the rear seats in this small SUV seat two six footers (and another, smaller middle passenger) very comfortably. see full Land Rover Range Rover Evoque review

See TrueDelta's information for all SUVs

See TrueDelta's information for all BMW models.