The fuel economy is considerably to Ford's advantage. This car uses 2.8 l less gasoline in the mixed cycle in comparison to the Land Rover Freelander II. Bear in mind that average fuel consumption in the combined cycle for the small off-road 4x4 segment, in which the Ford is classified, equals to 7.5 l while the Ford Kuga II uses by 12 percent less amount of fuel than the average.
The Ford Kuga II consumes 4.8 l less fuel in urban cycle in relation to the Land Rover. The difference at the level of 36 percent will be quite big in everyday use of car. Additionally, within years it may generate gigantic cost savings. Moreover keep in mind that presented results of the average fuel efficiency may be considerably increased if you ride swiftly. The difference in fuel economy of the cars selected by you is so huge that you should consider to choose vehicles with similar engines. Only then will the comparision be adequate.
Trunk capacity with seats down
Maximal torque RPM
The rotational speed at which the maximum torque is delivered shows us how fast an engine reaches its full efficiency with growth in revolutions. The lower rmp or the longer range in which the torque has the highest value, the more the engine is flexible and the kick of acceleration should be felt earlier.
Ford has 38 mm longer wheelbase when compared to the Land Rover Freelander II. A longer wheelbase provides more stable and comfortable ride, especially when driving fast. It also gives more storage space. However, vehicles with a longer wheelbase will not be as maneuverable as those with a shorter length between its axles.
The Ford is 1 percent longer than the Land Rover. Long vehicles are more spacious and usually have plenty of trunk space. While the Ford Kuga II 1.6 EcoBoost 150HP manual occurs to be better for families or persons who appreciate comfortable driving, the Land Rover Freelander II may be more appropriate to singles as it will not make troubles with parking and will have smaller turning radius.
Model release date
Production of the older vehicle commenced 6 years prior to its competitor thus man may suspect that this vehicle features significantly less advanced technologies used.
If you are a tall man or you happen to carry in the trunk thinks of big dimensions, the Ford Kuga II, which is by 5 mm higher than the Land Rover Freelander II, would be better option for you. However, compared vehicles do not differ much it the aspect of its height and it should not be much observable.