Rover 400 1995 vs BMW 3 series 1993
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 112 HP | 102 HP | |
| Torque: | 145 NM | 150 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.8 seconds | 12 seconds | |
|
Rover 400 is more dynamic to drive. Rover 400 engine produces 10 HP more power than BMW 3 series, but torque is 5 NM less than BMW 3 series. Thanks to more power Rover 400 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.2 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.1 | 7.7 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.9 l/100km | 8.0 l/100km | |
|
The Rover 400 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Rover 400 consumes 0.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than the BMW 3 series, which means that by driving the Rover 400 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 90 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Rover 400 consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the BMW 3 series. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 52 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 770 km in combined cycle | 670 km in combined cycle | |
| 1010 km on highway | 880 km on highway | ||
| 690 km with real consumption | 650 km with real consumption | ||
| Rover 400 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Rover 400) have better traction on slippery roads and when climbing hills, better fuel economy, and are less expensive to purchase. On the disadvantage side, FWD cars usually have less towing capacity, poorer acceleration and harder handling. Rear-wheel drive cars (BMW 3 series) have better handling on dry roads, better acceleration, more even weight distribution and more fun to drive. RWD is also better for towing large loads. The cons of rear-wheel drive are less interior and trunk space and more difficulty maneuvering in wet and snowy conditions. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 390'000 km | 420'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 10 years | 9 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Rover 25, Rover 200, Rover 45 | Used only for this car | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Rover 400 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.32 m | 4.21 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.39 m | 1.39 m | |
| Rover 400 is 11 cm longer than the BMW 3 series, width is practically the same also the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 370 litres | 325 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
720 litres | 1030 litres | |
| Rover 400 has 45 litres more trunk space than the BMW 3 series. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in BMW 3 series (by 310 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.3 meters | 10 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Rover 400 is 0.3 metres more than that of the BMW 3 series. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`640 | 1`635 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | low | |
| Average price (€): | no data | 2000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Rover 400 has
|
BMW 3 sērija has
| |