Land Rover Freelander 2003 vs Toyota RAV4 2006
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.2 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 112 HP | 177 HP | |
| Torque: | 260 NM | 400 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 14.4 seconds | 9.3 seconds | |
|
Toyota RAV4 is a more dynamic driving. Land Rover Freelander engine produces 65 HP less power than Toyota RAV4, whereas torque is 140 NM less than Toyota RAV4. Due to the lower power, Land Rover Freelander reaches 100 km/h speed 5.1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.6 | 7.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.1 l/100km | 8.7 l/100km | |
|
The Land Rover Freelander 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 0.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Toyota RAV4, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Land Rover Freelander could require 90 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Land Rover Freelander consumes 0.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Toyota RAV4. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 59 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 770 km in combined cycle | 850 km in combined cycle | |
| 880 km on highway | 980 km on highway | ||
| 720 km with real consumption | 680 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) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 350'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Land Rover Freelander engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 10 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Toyota Avensis, Toyota Corolla Verso, Lexus IS | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Toyota RAV4 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.42 m | 4.40 m | |
| Width: | 1.81 m | 1.86 m | |
| Height: | 1.72 m | 1.68 m | |
| Land Rover Freelander is 2 cm longer than the Toyota RAV4, 5 cm narrower, while the height of Land Rover Freelander is 4 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 586 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1470 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.6 meters | 10.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Land Rover Freelander is 1.4 metres more than that of the Toyota RAV4, which means Land Rover Freelander can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`000 | 2`190 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | high | |
| Toyota RAV4 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Land Rover Freelander has serious deffects in 25 percent more cases than Toyota RAV4, so Toyota RAV4 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 2800 | 4200 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.6/10 | 7.7/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Land Rover Freelander has
|
Toyota RAV4 has
| |