Land Rover Freelander 2003 vs Ford Maverick 2000
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.8 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 117 HP | 124 HP | |
| Torque: | 160 NM | 175 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.6 seconds | n/a seconds | |
| Land Rover Freelander engine produces 7 HP less power than Ford Maverick, whereas torque is 15 NM less than Ford Maverick. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 10.4 | 9.8 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 12.1 l/100km | 11.3 l/100km | |
|
The Ford Maverick is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Land Rover Freelander consumes 0.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Ford Maverick, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Land Rover Freelander could require 90 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Land Rover Freelander consumes 0.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Ford Maverick. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 64 litres | 58 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 610 km in combined cycle | 590 km in combined cycle | |
| 520 km with real consumption | 510 km with real consumption | ||
| 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) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.42 m | 4.39 m | |
| Width: | 1.81 m | 1.78 m | |
| Height: | 1.72 m | 1.72 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Land Rover Freelander is 3 cm longer than the Ford Maverick, 3 cm wider the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 985 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.6 meters | no data | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`000 | 2`015 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 2800 | 2400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
|
Ford Maverick has
| |