BMW X6 vs Land Rover Range Rover: Specs Compared

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 $3,150 for the BMW X6. That $300 yearly gap compounds to roughly $1,500 over five years and $2,400 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 and highway economy: the Land Rover Range Rover leads in both cycles — 26 mpg city and 30 mpg highway against 23 and 27 mpg — so its fuel-efficiency advantage holds whether you commute in traffic or cover long highway miles.

Powertrain choice: the BMW X6 is recorded with 4 distinct engine configurations (SIDI; Mild Hybrid, SIDI & PFI; Mild Hybrid, SIDI), the Land Rover Range Rover with 4 (SIDI; Mild Hybrid, SIDI, SIDI; PHEV). Across 47 recorded BMW X6 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 X6 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 359 g/mile for the BMW X6. Emissions track fuel consumption almost exactly, so the cleaner vehicle here is also the cheaper one to fuel.