Rover 200 1992 vs Toyota Celica 1991
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engines: | 1.4 - 1.6 | 2.0 | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 103 - 122 HP | 156 HP | |
| Torque: | 127 - 138 NM | 186 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.9 - 10.1 seconds | 9.3 seconds | |
| Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.1 - 8.5 | 8.0 | |
|
Rover 200 petrol engines consumes on average 0.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than Toyota Celica. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.22 m | 4.49 m | |
| Width: | 1.68 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.39 m | 1.32 m | |
|
Rover 200 is smaller, but higher. Rover 200 is 27 cm shorter than the Toyota Celica, 2 cm narrower, while the height of Rover 200 is 7 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 300 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.2 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Rover 200 is 0.8 metres less than that of the Toyota Celica, which means Rover 200 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | ~ 1`565 | ~ 1`200 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | no data | 3000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Rover 200 has
|
| |