Well, these are two pretty similar cars we have here! It's only details that could potentially make the difference. Considering they both belong to the suv segment and utilize the same 5-door suv body style and the 4 x 4 wheel drive system, it all comes up to the specific petrol engine choice they offer. The first one has a Honda-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 150hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 117hp engine designed by Rover.

The first thing to look into here would be the results from European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP) tests performed on the two cars. Good thing is that both vehicles got tested, with the Honda being a slightly better choice apparently. Moving further on, let's take a closer look at some additional safety-related facts. Both vehicles belong to the suv segment, which is generally a very good thing safety-wise, but it doesn't do much to help us decide between the two. Furthermore, taking kerb weight as an important factor into account, the Japanese car offers a marginal difference of 4% more metal.

I don't like generalizing things when it comes to reliability, although it does seem that Honda presents an order of magnitude better choice, when all the models are taken into account. These are the official statistics, while our visitors describe reliability of Honda with an average rating of 4.7, and models under the Land Rover badge with 3.8 out of 5. Some independent research have also placed CR-V as average reliability-wise, and Freelander is more or less at the same level.That apart, owners of different cars powered by the same engine as the Japanese car rank it on average as 5.0, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 4.6 out of 5.

Honda is undoubtly more agile, reaching 100km/h in 1.8 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 177 kilometers per hour, 7km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy the winner has to be the Japanese car, averaging around 9 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (31 mpg), in combined cycle. We can't ignore that 16% difference compared to the British car.

Honda is apparently more reliable, not too much, but just enough. The most important thing when deciding between any two vehicles should always be safety, both passive and active. In my opinion, everything taken into account, the Japanese car offers much better overall protection, which launches it ahead of the other contender. It all continues in the same direction, with Honda being considerably quicker, thus putting more smile on driver's face. To make things even better, it consumps less fuel! All together, there's not much more to say, in this case I wouldn't even consider anything but Honda. Anyway, that's the most objective conclusion I could've came up with and it's based solely on the information found on this website. Aspects such as design, practicality, brand value and driving experience are there for you to measure them out. I suggest you spend two more minutes in order to find out which car, based on your needs and budget, would be picked by the virtual adviser™, among more than 12.000 different ones in our database.