BMW X5 vs Land Rover Range Rover: Specs Compared
Also searched as Land Rover Range Rover vs BMW X5 specs — both orientations show this same side-by-side comparison.
The Land Rover Range Rover is the more efficient of the two: it reaches 28 mpg combined versus 27 mpg for the BMW X5, a 1 mpg advantage and costs about $50 less per year to fuel.
Across 5 measured categories, the Land Rover Range Rover leads in 4. Figures are EPA test data, not manufacturer claims.
2015–2027
BMW X5
Standard Sport Utility Vehicle 4WD · 61 configurations
2015–2027
Land Rover Range Rover
Standard Sport Utility Vehicle 4WD · 191 configurations
Head-to-head specifications
| Metric | BMW X5 | Land Rover Range Rover |
|---|---|---|
| Best combined MPG | 27 mpg | 28 mpg ✓ |
| Best city MPG | 24 mpg | 26 mpg ✓ |
| Best highway MPG | 31 mpg ✓ | 30 mpg |
| Lowest annual fuel costEPA estimate at 15,000 miles per year | $2,900 | $2,850 ✓ |
| Lowest CO2 output | 130 g/mi | 102 g/mi ✓ |
| Engines offered | SIDI & PFI; Mild Hybrid, SIDI; PHEV, SIDI; Mild Hybrid, SIDI | SIDI; Mild Hybrid, SIDI, SIDI; PHEV, SIDI; SV |
| Transmissions | Automatic (S8) | Automatic (S8), Automatic (S9) |
| Drivetrains | All-Wheel Drive, Rear-Wheel Drive | 4-Wheel Drive, All-Wheel Drive |
| Fuel types | Premium, Premium and Electricity, Diesel | Premium, Premium and Electricity, Diesel |
| EPA class | Standard Sport Utility Vehicle 4WD | Standard Sport Utility Vehicle 4WD |
| Years covered | 2015–2027 | 2015–2027 |
| Configurations on record | 61 | 191 |
Source: EPA fuel economy records via fueleconomy.gov. Best-case values across all recorded configurations for each model.
BMW X5 vs Land Rover Range Rover dimensions and size
The Land Rover Range Rover is 12.6 inches longer than the BMW X5 on a wheelbase 9.1 inches longer, and 231.5 lbs heavier. At over 200 inches, the larger of the two is past the comfortable limit of a standard 192-inch single garage bay once you allow walking room.
| Dimension | BMW X5 (2026) | Land Rover Range Rover (2026) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Length | 194.1 in | 206.7 in | 12.6 in |
| Width (excl. mirrors) | 78.7 in | 80.7 in | 2 in |
| Height | 68.9 in | 73.6 in | 4.7 in |
| Wheelbase | 116.9 in | 126 in | 9.1 in |
| Curb weight | 5,558 lbs | 5,789 lbs | 232 lbs |
Width excludes mirrors; add 8–12 inches for mirrors out. Figures are for the newest model year on record for each vehicle. See both drawn to scale.
BMW X5 vs Land Rover Range Rover: what the numbers mean
Running cost over five years: at the EPA's 15,000-mile-a-year assumption the Land Rover Range Rover burns about $2,850 of fuel annually against $2,900 for the BMW X5. That $50 yearly gap compounds to roughly $250 over five years and $400 over eight — often more than the price difference between two trims of the same vehicle, and the single largest running-cost line item separating these two.
City versus highway split: the Land Rover Range Rover is the stronger commuter at 26 mpg city, while the BMW X5 pulls ahead on the interstate at 31 mpg highway. If most of your driving is stop-and-go traffic the city figure is the one to weigh; for long-distance highway mileage the reverse is true, and the two vehicles effectively swap places depending on how you drive.
Powertrain choice: the BMW X5 is recorded with 4 distinct engine configurations (SIDI & PFI; Mild Hybrid, SIDI; PHEV, SIDI; Mild Hybrid), the Land Rover Range Rover with 4 (SIDI; Mild Hybrid, SIDI, SIDI; PHEV). Across 61 recorded BMW X5 configurations and 191 for the Land Rover Range Rover, the wider the engine spread the more the real-world fuel efficiency depends on which version you actually buy, so check the specific model year and drivetrain rather than the headline number.
Drivetrain and class: the BMW X5 is offered with All-Wheel Drive, Rear-Wheel Drive, the Land Rover Range Rover with 4-Wheel Drive, All-Wheel Drive. All-wheel drive typically costs one to two mpg combined against the same vehicle in front- or rear-wheel drive, which is worth remembering when the gap between these two is small. The EPA classes them as Standard Sport Utility Vehicle 4WD and Standard Sport Utility Vehicle 4WD respectively — the class drives the interior volume, cargo space and passenger space each one is measured against.
Tailpipe emissions: at their cleanest configurations the Land Rover Range Rover emits 102 g/mile of CO2 versus 130 g/mile for the BMW X5. Emissions track fuel consumption almost exactly, so the cleaner vehicle here is also the cheaper one to fuel.
X5 vs Range Rover: common questions
Which is better on gas, the BMW X5 or the Land Rover Range Rover?
The Land Rover Range Rover is the more efficient of the two: it reaches 28 mpg combined versus 27 mpg for the BMW X5, a 1 mpg advantage and costs about $50 less per year to fuel.
Which costs less to run per year?
By EPA estimates at 15,000 miles a year, the Land Rover Range Rover runs about $2,850 a year in fuel at its most efficient configuration, versus about $2,900 for the BMW X5 — a difference of roughly $50 per year.
What engines do the X5 and Range Rover offer?
BMW X5: SIDI & PFI; Mild Hybrid, SIDI; PHEV, SIDI; Mild Hybrid, SIDI. Land Rover Range Rover: SIDI; Mild Hybrid, SIDI, SIDI; PHEV, SIDI; SV.
Are they in the same vehicle class?
Yes — the EPA classifies both the BMW X5 and the Land Rover Range Rover as Standard Sport Utility Vehicle 4WD, so they compete directly.
More X5 comparisons
More Range Rover comparisons
Comparison id: bmw-x5-vs-land-rover-range-rover