Land Rover Range Rover Sport vs Ford Everest
A detailed look at how two of Australia's most popular SUVs compare on price, running costs, safety, and everyday livability.
Specifications and pricing correct at time of publishing. Prices are RRP before on-road costs unless stated otherwise. Always confirm with the manufacturer or dealer before purchasing.
Land Rover Range Rover Sport
Price TBC
SUV
Diesel
3.0 i6 Diesel Mild Hybrid
183kW
7.4 L/100km
ANCAP: no data
835L
Ford Everest
From $59,490
SUV
Diesel
Diesel Bi-Turbo
154kW
7.2 L/100km
5★ ANCAP
259L
Track the Land Rover Range Rover Sport & Ford Everest
Get price-drop alerts on these models plus our free weekly new-car rundown. Unsubscribe anytime.
Price Breakdown
Pricing for one or both models is yet to be confirmed for the Australian market. We will update this comparison when official RRPs are announced.
Safety Rundown
ANCAP safety ratings have not been published for both models yet. We will update this section when crash test results are available.
Feature Showdown
The Land Rover Range Rover Sport features a 13.1-inch touchscreen paired with a 13.7-inch digital dash, while the Ford Everest gets a 10.1-inch display and 8-inch instruments. Apple CarPlay and Android Auto are standard across both.
The Land Rover Range Rover Sport stands out with heated front seats, power tailgate, Meridian audio and ambient lighting that you will not find on the Ford Everest. Which feature set matters more depends on your daily routine and priorities.
Interior trim differs: the Land Rover Range Rover Sport gets leather upholstery while the Ford Everest offers cloth. Climate control is 3-zone in the Land Rover Range Rover Sport and 2-zone in the Ford Everest.
Drivetrain
The Land Rover Range Rover Sport uses a 3.0 i6 Diesel Mild Hybrid producing 183kW and 600Nm of torque, sent through a 8-speed automatic to a AWD layout. It covers the 0-100km/h sprint in 7.7 seconds.
The Ford Everest responds with a Diesel Bi-Turbo making 154kW and 500Nm, paired to a automatic driving the rear wheels. It gets to 100km/h in 10.1 seconds.
The Land Rover Range Rover Sport has the clear power advantage at 183kW vs 154kW. In the real-world sprint, the Land Rover Range Rover Sport is 2.4s quicker. For most buyers, the way each car feels day-to-day matters more than outright acceleration.
Space & Comfort
The Land Rover Range Rover Sport measures 4,946mm long on a 2,997mm wheelbase, 32mm shorter than the Ford Everest at 4,978mm (2,900mm wheelbase). The longer wheelbase on the Land Rover Range Rover Sport generally means more rear legroom.
Boot space is 835L in the Land Rover Range Rover Sport and 259L in the Ford Everest, giving the Land Rover Range Rover Sport a 576L advantage.
For towing, the Ford Everest leads with a 3,500kg braked capacity vs 3,500kg. That 0kg difference matters if you regularly hitch up.
Turning Circle
Kerb-to-kerb diameter. Smaller turns easier in tight carparks and U-turns.
11.0m to 11.8m
Based on 11.0m turning circle:
- U-turn on standard street (7m+ wide)
- Standard parking bay
- Tight carparks
- Narrow laneways
Based on 11.8m turning circle:
- U-turn on standard street (7m+ wide)
- Standard parking bay
- Tight carparks
- Narrow laneways
Turning circle ratings
True Cost to Own
Based on 15,000km of annual driving, fuel costs roughly $2,109/year for the Land Rover Range Rover Sport and $2,052/year for the Ford Everest. That is a $57 annual difference in favour of the Ford Everest.
Estimated annual total: $2,109 (Land Rover Range Rover Sport) vs $2,052 (Ford Everest). The Ford Everest saves you roughly $57 per year in total ownership costs. Use our Fuel Cost Calculator to estimate based on your driving.
Warranty: 5 years / 999,999km (Land Rover Range Rover Sport) vs 5 years / 999,999km (Ford Everest). Both match on warranty length.
Who Should Buy Which?
Buy the Land Rover Range Rover Sport if: You prioritise performance, need more boot space, or prefer Land Rover's approach to design and ownership experience.
Buy the Ford Everest if: You want lower running costs, or prefer Ford's approach to design and ownership experience.
The Verdict
The Land Rover Range Rover Sport takes 3 of 4 key spec categories. The Ford Everest will save you roughly $57 a year in fuel. If boot space matters, the Land Rover Range Rover Sport has a clear edge. The best pick depends on what you value most. Explore the full specs for each model below.
Common questions
Which is cheapest, Land Rover Range Rover Sport and Ford Everest?
The Ford Everest is the cheapest at $59,490 before on-road costs.
Which is the most fuel-efficient?
The Ford Everest uses the least fuel at 7.2L/100km on the combined cycle.
Which is safest?
They are evenly matched — Ford Everest all hold a 5-star ANCAP rating. Compare the active-safety features above to separate them.
Which has the most boot space?
The Land Rover Range Rover Sport has the largest boot at 835L.
Which can tow the most?
The Land Rover Range Rover Sport has the highest braked towing capacity at 3,500kg.
Which is the most powerful?
The Land Rover Range Rover Sport makes the most power at 183kW. The Land Rover Range Rover Sport is quickest to 100km/h in 7.7s.
Free: Chinese Cars in Australia Cheat Sheet
Sign up free and we'll email you our Chinese Cars Cheat Sheet (PDF) — all 22 brands ranked on service, parts, warranty and dealer experience. Plus new-car launches, reviews and founding-member pricing on the upcoming CarSorted Pro Report. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.
By subscribing, you agree to receive marketing emails. You can unsubscribe at any time. View our Privacy Policy.
Disclaimer: All information in this comparison was believed to be correct at the time of publishing (20 April 2026). Prices are manufacturer recommended retail prices (RRP) and may vary by state, dealer, and options. Driveaway costs include estimated on-road costs for Victoria. Fuel economy figures are WLTP/ADR combined cycle. Specifications can change without notice. Always verify with the manufacturer before making a purchase decision. CarSorted does not accept payment for recommendations.
Auto-generated from CarSorted's specification data · 20 April 2026
Comments (0)
Sign in to join the conversation
No comments yet. Be the first!
