Land Rover Freelander 2003 vs Honda CR-V 2002
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.5 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 177 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 240 NM | 190 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.1 seconds | 10 seconds | |
| Land Rover Freelander engine produces 27 HP more power than Honda CR-V, whereas torque is 50 NM more than Honda CR-V. Despite the higher power, Land Rover Freelander reaches 100 km/h speed 1.1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 12.4 | 9.1 | |
|
The Honda CR-V is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Land Rover Freelander consumes 3.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Honda CR-V, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Land Rover Freelander could require 495 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 64 litres | 58 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 510 km in combined cycle | 630 km in combined cycle | |
| 650 km on highway | 750 km on highway | ||
| Honda CR-V 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) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 350'000 km | 420'000 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 Honda CR-V engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 10 years | 10 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Rover 75, Kia Carnival, Rover 400 | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Honda Civic, Honda Accord, Honda FR-V, Honda Stream | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Honda CR-V 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. | |||
| Honda CR-V 2002 2.0 engine: In 2001, Honda introduced the K-series engine lineup, featuring an aluminum block with an open-deck design and cast-iron cylinder liners. It utilizes a port fuel injection system, a 16-valve aluminum cylinder head without hydraulic lifters, individual ignition coils, a VTC cam ... More about Honda CR-V 2002 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.42 m | 4.58 m | |
| Width: | 1.81 m | 1.78 m | |
| Height: | 1.72 m | 1.71 m | |
| Land Rover Freelander is 16 cm shorter than the Honda CR-V, 3 cm wider, while the height of Land Rover Freelander is 1 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 525 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
no data | 952 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.6 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Land Rover Freelander is 1.2 metres more than that of the Honda CR-V, which means Land Rover Freelander can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight: | 2`000 kg | 1`910 kg | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | above average | |
| Land Rover Freelander has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Honda CR-V has serious deffects in 15 percent more cases than Land Rover Freelander, so Land Rover Freelander quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 2600 | 1800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Land Rover Freelander has
|
Honda CR-V has
| |