Land Rover Freelander 2012 vs Renault Koleos 2013
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.2 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain and belt | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 190 HP | 173 HP | |
| Torque: | 420 NM | 360 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.5 seconds | 11.9 seconds | |
|
Land Rover Freelander is more dynamic to drive. Land Rover Freelander engine produces 17 HP more power than Renault Koleos, whereas torque is 60 NM more than Renault Koleos. Thanks to more power Land Rover Freelander reaches 100 km/h speed 2.4 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.0 | 7.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.9 l/100km | 8.2 l/100km | |
|
The Renault Koleos is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Land Rover Freelander consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Renault Koleos, which means that by driving the Land Rover Freelander over 15,000 km in a year you can save 15 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Land Rover Freelander consumes 0.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Renault Koleos. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 68 litres | 65 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 970 km in combined cycle | 910 km in combined cycle | |
| 1190 km on highway | 1040 km on highway | ||
| 760 km with real consumption | 790 km with real consumption | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 10 years | 14 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Jaguar XF, Land Rover Discovery Sport | Installed on at least 10 other car models, including Nissan X-Trail, Nissan Qashqai, Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Opel Vivaro | |
| 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. | |||
| 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 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.50 m | 4.52 m | |
| Width: | 1.91 m | 1.86 m | |
| Height: | 1.74 m | 1.70 m | |
| Land Rover Freelander is 2 cm shorter than the Renault Koleos, 6 cm wider, while the height of Land Rover Freelander is 5 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 405 litres | 450 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1380 litres | |
|
Renault Koleos has more luggage space. Land Rover Freelander has 45 litres less trunk space than the Renault Koleos. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.3 meters | 11.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Land Rover Freelander is 0.3 metres less than that of the Renault Koleos. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`505 | 2`300 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 9600 | 8200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Land Rover Freelander has
|
Renault Koleos has
| |