Seat Toledo 1995 vs Rover 200 1995
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
| Gearbox: | Manual/Automatic | Manual/Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engines: | 1.6 - 2.0 | 1.4 - 2.0 | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 64 - 150 HP | 75 - 145 HP | |
| Torque: | 124 - 235 NM | 117 - 210 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.4 - 17.9 seconds | 7.5 - 13.3 seconds | |
| Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.1 - 9.7 | 5.6 - 7.8 | |
|
Seat Toledo petrol engines consumes on average 1 litres more fuel per 100 km than Rover 200. On average, Seat Toledo equipped with diesel engines consume 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Rover 200. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.32 m | 3.97 m | |
| Width: | 1.66 m | 1.69 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.42 m | |
| Seat Toledo is 35 cm longer than the Rover 200, 3 cm narrower the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 304 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1086 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.5 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Seat Toledo is 0.1 metres more than that of the Rover 200. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | ~ 1`120 | ~ 1`527 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | low | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 1000 | no data | |
| Pros and Cons: |
|
Rover 200 has
| |