Land Rover Freelander 2003 vs Subaru Forester 2002
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.5 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 177 HP | 125 HP | |
| Torque: | 240 NM | 184 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.1 seconds | 13.4 seconds | |
|
Land Rover Freelander is more dynamic to drive. Land Rover Freelander engine produces 52 HP more power than Subaru Forester, whereas torque is 56 NM more than Subaru Forester. Thanks to more power Land Rover Freelander reaches 100 km/h speed 2.3 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 12.4 | 8.6 | |
|
The Subaru Forester is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Land Rover Freelander consumes 3.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Subaru Forester, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Land Rover Freelander could require 570 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 64 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 510 km in combined cycle | 690 km in combined cycle | |
| 650 km on highway | 890 km on highway | ||
| Subaru Forester gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 350'000 km | 380'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 10 years | 7 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Rover 75, Kia Carnival, Rover 400 | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Subaru Impreza, Subaru Legacy | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Land Rover Freelander 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.42 m | 4.45 m | |
| Width: | 1.81 m | 1.74 m | |
| Height: | 1.72 m | 1.59 m | |
| Land Rover Freelander is 3 cm shorter than the Subaru Forester, 7 cm wider, while the height of Land Rover Freelander is 13 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.6 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Land Rover Freelander is 1 metres more than that of the Subaru Forester, which means Land Rover Freelander can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`000 | 1`500 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | above average | high | |
| Subaru Forester has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Land Rover Freelander, so Subaru Forester quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 2600 | 2400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Land Rover Freelander has
|
Subaru Forester has
| |