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 3-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 Rover-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 6-cylinder, 24-valves 177hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 150hp engine designed by Toyota.

The fact that the Land Rover got tested by the European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP), while the other contender didn't, isn't really an advantage, taken the poor 3-star rating it received. That aside, let's consider some other aspects which affect safety. Both vehicles belong to the suv segment, which is generally a very good thing safety-wise, but that fact doesn't break the tie between the two cars. Furthermore, when it comes to weight, a factor that most people underestimate, the British car offers a potentially life-saving difference of 30% more metal.

Reliability is not the best thing to consider on the make level, but it is worth mentioning that Toyota is significantly less fault-prone, when all the models are taken into account. These are the results of an independent reasearch, while our visitors describe reliability of Land Rover with an average rating of 3.8, and models under the Toyota badge with 4.6 out of 5. Independent research findings rank Freelander as average reliability-wise, and RAV4 is more or less at the same level.We should definitely mention that owners of cars with the same powertrain as the British car rank it on average as 5.0, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 4.6 out of 5.

Toyota is a bit more agile, reaching 100km/h in 0.5 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 185 kilometers per hour, 3km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy an obvious choice would be the Japanese car, averaging around 8.8 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (32 mpg), in combined cycle. That's 41% difference compared to the British car!

Toyota appears just a bit more reliable, although the difference is truly marginal. 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 British car beats the other contender by far, making it the best choice without even considering other things. From there things take a different direction, with Toyota offering somewhat better performance, just enough to call it quicker. To make things even better, it consumps less fuel! No mistake, whatever you decide here, but I'd still go for the Toyota. 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. In case you have two minutes to spare I invite you to define your needs, desires and budget and see which car would be chosen by the virtual adviser™, among more than 12.000 different ones in our database.