Land Cruiser Hardtop DX Gas - 3 Doors 4x4 MT vs 300 Challenger 2.0T Comparison
Review Comparison
Positive
- No data found
Negative
- No data found
Positive
- Robust and distinctive exterior design
- High off road driving capabilities
- Advanced technology and comprehensive security systems
Negative
- Relatively high fuel consumption
- Limited interior space for rear seats
- Less efficient performance on highways
Price Comparison
SAR 144424
SAR 149327
SAR 138920
SAR 143635
SAR 1944
SAR 2010
Fuel Consumption Comparison
0.13 L/KM
0.1 L/KM
Daily Fule Payment
SAR 19.11
Daily Fule Payment
SAR 14.7
Weekly Fule Payment
SAR 133.77
Weekly Fule Payment
SAR 102.9
Monthly Fule Payment
SAR 573.3
Monthly Fule Payment
SAR 441
Yearly Fule Payment
SAR 6975.15
Yearly Fule Payment
SAR 5365.5
Hide common specs
Car Information
Engine / Motor
6
4
/
200 km/h
/
1998 cc
/
Chinese
Dimensions
5
5 Seater
16
/
4330
4760 mm
1800
1930 mm
1955
1927 mm
2310
2750 mm
/
5 Doors
/
400 L
/
224 m
Fuel Economy
7.8
10 Km/L
90
75 L
/
10 Km/L
Comfort
✓
/
✓
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
Keyless Entry
Interior
✓
/
✓
/
Fabric
Leather
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
Digital
/
Dual Zone
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
Electric
/
✓
/
✓
/
Standard
Safety
Driver And Front Passenger
/
✓
/
✓
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
Infotainment
6.7
12.3
✓
/
✓
✓
2
9
/
✓
/
✓
/
Android LCD
/
✓
Transmission
✓
/
5 Speed Manual Transmission
Automatic
Chassis & Steering
Four-Wheel Drive
Four Wheel Drive
Wheels/brakes
✓
/
✓
/
Drum
/
225/95R16C
/
225/95R16C
/
Exterior
✓
/
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
LED
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
Engine
4.0
2.0 L
Gasoline
Gasoline
228
224 BHP
360
387 Nm
/
In-Line
/
Single Turbo
/
4
Technologies
✓
/
✓
✓
✓
/
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
.png?x-oss-process=image/format,webp/interlace,1/quality,q_70/resize,w_750)
.png?x-oss-process=image/format,webp/interlace,1/quality,q_70/resize,w_750)
