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 4-cylinder, 16-valves 166hp engine designed by Honda.

Both vehicles got tested by European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP), with the Land Rover being a slightly better choice apparently. Still, apart from the official crash test results there are other things we need to be aware of. 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 considerable difference of 22% more metal.

Manufacturers have been building their reliability reputation for decades now and, generally speaking, it appears that Honda presents an order of magnitude better choice, when all the models are taken into account. That's the official data, while our visitors describe reliability of Land Rover with an average rating of 3.8, and models under the Honda badge with 4.7 out of 5. The same official information place Freelander as average reliability-wise, and CR-V is more or less at the same level.That apart, owners of different cars powered by the same engine as the British car rank it on average as 4.7, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 3.0 out of 5.

Land Rover is undoubtly more agile, reaching 100km/h in 2.1 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 200 kilometers per hour, 10km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy the winner has to be the Japanese car, averaging around 9.5 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (30 mpg), in combined cycle. We can't ignore that 18% difference compared to the British car.

Honda 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. It all continues in the same direction, with Land Rover being considerably quicker, thus putting more smile on driver's face. It does come at a cost though, and that's the fuel consumption... No mistake, whatever you decide here, but I'd still go for the Land Rover. In any case that's my personal view, built upon all the data available to me. What should decide here though is the way you feel about the two vehicles, and I hope you'll find my guidelines useful in the process. 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 thousands of similar, yet so different vehicles.