The aim of this study was to evaluate production performance, carcass characteristics and nutritive value of meat of rabbits reared under the 2 prevailing feeding strategies in Uruguay. One week after weaning, 96 purebred V line rabbits were randomly distributed between 2 treatments: (T1) commercial pelleted food ad libitum and (T2) commercial pelleted food ad libitum plus fresh alfalfa ad libitum. Each treatment included 12 cages containing 4 individuals each (2 males and 2 females). Growth performance characteristics (live weight evolution, commercial food consumption and food/gain ratio) were evaluated. The consumption of alfalfa was not measured. Rabbits were slaughtered at a live weight of 2500 g and carcass characteristics were evaluated. Samples of meat and dissectible fat were analysed to determine intramuscular fat content at muscle L. dorsi, dissectible fat and intramuscular fat composition, minerals (Zn, Fe, Mg and Na), vitamin E and purines. Sensory evaluations were conducted to assess the effect of treatments on the consumer’s perception of differences and the existence of attributes determining preferences. Differences between treatments were significant for total commercial food intake (23356 vs. 20930 g/cage; P<0.001) and feed conversion ratio (3.82 vs. 3.41; P<0.01) for T1 and T2 respectively. No significant differences were found in average daily gain, age at slaughter and carcass characteristics. There were no significant differences in the intramuscular fat content. The fatty acid composition of dissectible and intramuscular fat was affected by the inclusion of alfalfa in the diet increasing the linolenic acid content (1.82 vs. 3.28% and 2.29 vs. 5.15% for T1 and T2 at intramuscular and dissectible fat, respectively; P<0.001), and improving the n-6/n-3 relationship (8.60 vs. 5.82 and 11.58 vs. 5.64 for T1 and T2 at intramuscular and dissectible fat, respectively; P<0.001). There were no significant differences in vitamin E, Fe or Zn content between treatments, but differences were significant in Mg (22.5 vs. 24.4 mg/100 g for T1 and T2; P<0.05) and Na (44.1 vs. 48.2 mg/100 g; P<0.05). In the sensory evaluation, panellists significantly perceived differences between treatments with 95% confidence.