Model Year | 2009 | 2016 | |
Model | Cadillac SRX | Land Rover Range Rover | |
Engine | |||
Transmission | |||
Drivetrain | |||
Body | 4dr SUV | 4dr SUV | |
Difference | |||
Wheelbase | 2,957 mm | 2,921 mm | 0 mm |
Length | 4,950 mm | 4,999 mm | 0 mm |
Width | 1,844 mm | 1,984 mm | 0 mm |
Height | 1,722 mm | 1,836 mm | 0 mm |
Curb Weight | 1,889 kg | 2,336 kg | -1 kg |
Fuel Capacity | 76 L | 105 L | -29 L |
Headroom, Row 1 | 1,024 mm | 998 mm | -997 mm |
Shoulder Room, Row 1 | 1,491 mm | 1,542 mm | 0 mm |
Hip Room, Row 1 | 1,430 mm | 0 mm | 1 mm |
Legroom, Row 1 | 1,069 mm | 1,080 mm | 0 mm |
Headroom, Row 2 | 975 mm | 996 mm | -21 mm |
Shoulder Room, Row 2 | 1,463 mm | 1,509 mm | 0 mm |
Hip Room, Row 2 | 1,430 mm | 0 mm | 1 mm |
Legroom, Row 2 | 1,041 mm | 1,021 mm | 0 mm |
Headroom, Row 3 | 889 mm | 0 mm | 889 mm |
Shoulder Room, Row 3 | 1,107 mm | 0 mm | 1 mm |
Hip Room, Row 3 | 1,400 mm | 0 mm | 1 mm |
Legroom, Row 3 | 615 mm | 0 mm | 615 mm |
Total Legroom | 2,725 mm (over 3 rows) | 2,101 mm (over 2 rows) | 0 mm |
Cargo Volume, Minimum | 238 L | 909 L | -671 L |
Cargo Volume, Behind R2 | 917 L | 32.1 | 884.9 L |
Cargo Volume, Maximum | 1,968 L | 2,030 L | -1 L |
2009 Cadillac SRX Seat Room and Comfort: Pros | ||
Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
2008 | 4dr SUV 255-horsepower 3.6L V6 5-speed shiftable automatic AWD |
2 teenage kids love it see full Cadillac SRX review |
2009 Cadillac SRX Seat Room and Comfort: Cons | ||
Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
2008 | 4dr SUV 255-horsepower 3.6L V6 5-speed shiftable automatic AWD |
Seat belts attached to front seats and not adjustable up and down. Lower sitting heighth than Lexus or other crossover SUVs or at least the appearance of same. see full Cadillac SRX review |
2008 | 4dr SUV 255-horsepower 3.6L V6 5-speed shiftable automatic AWD |
The center console is too wide and gets in the way see full Cadillac SRX review |
None of our members have yet commented on the seat room and comfort of the 2016 Land Rover Range Rover.