2002 • Ford
Puma
Ford Puma 1.7 16V (125 Hp) 2002Overall Score59.5/100
2002 Ford Puma vs 2002 Land Rover Freelander Comparison
Compare technical specifications, scores and everyday-use differences side by side.
2002 • Land Rover
Freelander
Land Rover Freelander 1.8 i 16V (117 Hp) 2002Overall Score59.25/100
WINNER
Ford Puma
Leads the overall E-Kıyasla score by 0.25 points.
59.5–59.25
SPECIFICATION GROUPS
Every difference between the two cars
Basic Specifications
Ford PumaSpecificationLand Rover Freelander
FordMakeLand Rover
PumaModelFreelander
2002Model year2002
CoupeBody typeOff-road vehicle
2+2Seats5
3Doors5
Performance
Ford PumaSpecificationLand Rover Freelander
9,2 s0–100 km/h11,8 s
203 km/hTop speed160 km/h
1679 ccEngine displacement1796 cc
125 HPPower117 HP
157 NmTorque160 Nm
4Cylinders4
Fuel & Consumption
Ford PumaSpecificationLand Rover Freelander
PetrolFuel typePetrol
42 ltFuel tank60 lt
9,7 ltUrban consumption12,9 lt
6,1 ltExtra-urban consumption8,1 lt
7,5 ltAverage consumption9,8 lt
Transmission & Chassis
Ford PumaSpecificationLand Rover Freelander
Front-wheel driveDrivetrain4x4
5Gears5
195/50 R15Tyre size195/80 R15 S; 215/75 R15
YesABSYes
Dimensions
Ford PumaSpecificationLand Rover Freelander
3984 mmLength4368 mm
1674 mmWidth1809 mm
1345 mmHeight1708 mm
1040 KgWeight1510 Kg
2446 mmWheelbase2557 mm
E-Kıyasla Editor’s Note
2002 Ford Puma and 2002 Land Rover Freelander approach the same decision from different angles. We compare the exact versions so changes in engine, transmission, dimensions and equipment are not hidden behind the model names.
Overall, Ford Puma leads the E-Kıyasla score by 0.25 points. The score provides a consistent summary, while the best choice can still change with priorities such as urban efficiency, luggage space, performance or equipment.
SIMILAR COMPARISONS
Similar comparisons
Explore related comparisons featuring cars from this matchup.
VS
VS
VS
VSComments are loading…