Land Rover Range Rover Evoque 2010 vs Land Rover Freelander 2012
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
| Gearbox: | Manual/Automatic | Manual/Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engines: | 2.0 - 2.2 | 2.0 - 2.2 | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 - 240 HP | 150 - 240 HP | |
| Torque: | 340 - 420 NM | 340 - 420 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7.6 - 10.8 seconds | 8.8 - 11.7 seconds | |
| Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.6 - 8.7 | 6.0 - 9.6 | |
|
Land Rover Range Rover Evoque petrol engines consumes on average 0.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than Land Rover Freelander. On average, Land Rover Range Rover Evoque equipped with diesel engines consume 0.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Land Rover Freelander. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.36 m | 4.50 m | |
| Width: | 1.95 m | 1.91 m | |
| Height: | 1.64 m | 1.74 m | |
| Land Rover Range Rover Evoque is 14 cm shorter than the Land Rover Freelander, 4 cm wider, while the height of Land Rover Range Rover Evoque is 10 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 575 litres | 405 litres | |
|
Land Rover Range Rover Evoque has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, Land Rover Range Rover Evoque has 170 litres more trunk space than the Land Rover Freelander. The Land Rover Freelander may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.3 meters | 11.3 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | ~ 2`350 | ~ 2`505 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 14 800 | 10 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Land Rover Range Rover Evoque has
|
Land Rover Freelander has
| |