Land Rover Freelander 2003 vs Subaru Forester 2002
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 112 HP | 125 HP | |
| Torque: | 260 NM | 184 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 14.4 seconds | 13.4 seconds | |
|
Subaru Forester is a more dynamic driving. Land Rover Freelander engine produces 13 HP less power than Subaru Forester, but torque is 76 NM more than Subaru Forester. Due to the lower power, Land Rover Freelander reaches 100 km/h speed 1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.6 | 8.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.1 l/100km | 10.0 l/100km | |
|
The Land Rover Freelander is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Land Rover Freelander consumes 1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Subaru Forester, which means that by driving the Land Rover Freelander over 15,000 km in a year you can save 150 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Land Rover Freelander consumes 1.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Subaru Forester. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 59 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 770 km in combined cycle | 690 km in combined cycle | |
| 880 km on highway | 890 km on highway | ||
| 720 km with real consumption | 600 km with real consumption | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 380'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 7 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Subaru Impreza, Subaru Legacy | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Subaru Forester might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Land Rover Freelander engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.45 m | 4.45 m | |
| Width: | 1.81 m | 1.74 m | |
| Height: | 1.71 m | 1.59 m | |
| Land Rover Freelander and Subaru Forester are practically the same length. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.6 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Land Rover Freelander is 1 metres more than that of the Subaru Forester, which means Land Rover Freelander can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`000 | 1`500 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | above average | high | |
| Subaru Forester has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Land Rover Freelander, so Subaru Forester quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 3200 | 2600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Land Rover Freelander has
|
Subaru Forester has
| |