Renault Koleos 2013 vs Land Rover Freelander 2012
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.2 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain and belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 173 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 360 NM | 420 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.9 seconds | 11.7 seconds | |
|
Land Rover Freelander is a more dynamic driving. Renault Koleos engine produces 23 HP more power than Land Rover Freelander, but torque is 60 NM less than Land Rover Freelander. Despite the higher power, Renault Koleos reaches 100 km/h speed 0.2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.1 | 6.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.2 l/100km | 8.3 l/100km | |
|
By specification Renault Koleos consumes 1.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Land Rover Freelander, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Renault Koleos could require 165 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Renault Koleos consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Land Rover Freelander. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 65 litres | 68 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 910 km in combined cycle | 1130 km in combined cycle | |
| 1040 km on highway | 1250 km on highway | ||
| 790 km with real consumption | 810 km with real consumption | ||
| Land Rover Freelander gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 14 years | 10 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 10 other car models, including Nissan X-Trail, Nissan Qashqai, Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Opel Vivaro | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Jaguar XF, Land Rover Discovery Sport | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Renault Koleos might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Renault Koleos 2013 2.0 engine: The engine has a good power to fuel consumption ratio and, with careful maintenance, a long service life. The most common problems with these engines are with the fuel injection system and lubrication. Land Rover Freelander 2012 2.2 engine: This engine is recognized for its reliability, power, and relatively low fuel consumption, as well as its durability in demanding conditions without frequent failures. However, it is sensitible to oil quality ... More about Land Rover Freelander 2012 2.2 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.52 m | 4.50 m | |
| Width: | 1.86 m | no data | |
| Height: | 1.70 m | 1.74 m | |
| Trunk capacity: | 450 litres | 405 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1380 litres | no data | |
|
Renault Koleos has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, Renault Koleos has 45 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: | 11.6 meters | 11.3 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Renault Koleos is 0.3 metres more than that of the Land Rover Freelander. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`300 | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 8200 | 8200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Renault Koleos has
|
Land Rover Freelander has
| |