DETAILED CAR COMPARISON

2000 Land Rover Freelander vs 2000 Ford Puma Comparison

Compare technical specifications, scores and everyday-use differences side by side.

VS
WINNER

Ford Puma

Leads the overall E-Kıyasla score by 0.25 points.

59.25–59.5
SPECIFICATION GROUPS

Every difference between the two cars

Basic Specifications

Land RoverMakeFord
FreelanderModelPuma
2000Model year2000
Off-road vehicleBody typeCoupe
5Seats2+2
5Doors3

Performance

11,9 s0–100 km/h9,2 s
165 km/hTop speed203 km/h
1796 ccEngine displacement1679 cc
120 HPPower125 HP
165 NmTorque157 Nm
4Cylinders4

Fuel & Consumption

PetrolFuel typePetrol
59 ltFuel tank42 lt
13 ltUrban consumption9,7 lt
8,6 ltExtra-urban consumption6,1 lt
9,8 ltAverage consumption7,5 lt

Transmission & Chassis

4x4DrivetrainFront-wheel drive
5Gears5
195/80 R15Tyre size195/50 R15
YesABSYes

Dimensions

4382 mmLength3984 mm
1805 mmWidth1674 mm
1760 mmHeight1345 mm
1380 KgWeight1040 Kg
2560 mmWheelbase2446 mm

E-Kıyasla Editor’s Note

2000 Land Rover Freelander and 2000 Ford Puma 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.

Comments are loading…