Rover 400 1996 vs Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution 1998
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
| Gearbox: | Manual/Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rover 400 is available with both manual and automatic gearboxes, whereas Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution is available only with manual gearbox. | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
| Rover 400 is available with front wheel drive, while Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution can be equipped with four wheel (4x4) drive. | |||
| Engines: | 1.4 - 2.5 (petrol, diesel) | 2.0 (petrol) | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 86 - 175 HP | 280 HP | |
| Torque: | 127 - 240 NM | 373 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.5 - 14 seconds | n/a seconds | |
| Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.3 - 10.2 | 10.0 | |
|
Rover 400 petrol engines consumes on average 1.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.49 m | 4.35 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.77 m | |
| Height: | 1.39 m | 1.42 m | |
| Rover 400 is 14 cm longer than the Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution, 7 cm narrower, while the height of Rover 400 is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 470 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
810 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.3 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Rover 400 is 0.7 metres less than that of the Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution, which means Rover 400 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | ~ 1`684 | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | no data | 7600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Rover 400 has
|
Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution has
| |