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 Volvo-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 6-cylinder, 24-valves 235hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 6-cylinder, 24-valves 230hp engine designed by General Motors.

A starting point here would be to take a look at the results from European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP) tests which were performed on both of the cars, with the Land Rover 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 that fact doesn't break the tie between the two cars. Furthermore, if we'd like to consider vehicle mass in this context too, which we definitely should, the British car offers a marginal difference of 9% more metal.

I don't like generalizing things when it comes to reliability, although it does seem that Suzuki presents an order of magnitude better choice, all the models observed together. That's the official data, while our visitors describe reliability of Land Rover with an average rating of 3.8, and models under the Suzuki badge with 4.5 out of 5. Some independent research have also placed Freelander as average reliability-wise, and Grand Vitara is more or less at the same level.Above it all, drivers of cars with the same engine as the British car rank it on average as 4.7, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 5.0 out of 5.

Land Rover is a bit more agile, reaching 100km/h in 0.4 seconds less than its competitor. Still, it lacks the power to win the top speed competition, topping at 200 kilometers per hour, exactly the same as the other car does. When it comes to fuel economy things look pretty much the same for both cars, averaging around 10.9 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (26 mpg), in combined cycle.

Suzuki 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 British car offers much better overall protection, which launches it ahead of the other contender. It all continues in the same direction, with Land Rover offering somewhat better performance, just enough to call it quicker. It does come at a cost though, and that's the fuel consumption... It's really tough to make a final decision here, but if I'd need to, I'd say Land Rover. 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. Also, you could use the oportunity to find out which car, everything taken into account, would be the perfect choice for you in the eyes of the virtual adviser™, out of 12.000+ vehicles we currently have in our database.