BMW 3 series 2001 vs Rover 200 1993
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 143 HP | 122 HP | |
| Torque: | 200 NM | 138 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10 seconds | 8.9 seconds | |
| BMW 3 series engine produces 21 HP more power than Rover 200, whereas torque is 62 NM more than Rover 200. Despite the higher power, BMW 3 series reaches 100 km/h speed 1.1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.7 | 8.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.4 l/100km | 8.6 l/100km | |
|
The BMW 3 series is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification BMW 3 series consumes 0.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Rover 200, which means that by driving the BMW 3 series over 15,000 km in a year you can save 120 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, BMW 3 series consumes 0.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Rover 200. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 63 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 810 km in combined cycle | 640 km in combined cycle | |
| 750 km with real consumption | 630 km with real consumption | ||
| BMW 3 series gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Rover 200) 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.49 m | 4.22 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.68 m | |
| Height: | 1.37 m | 1.39 m | |
|
BMW 3 series is larger, but slightly lower. BMW 3 series is 27 cm longer than the Rover 200, 8 cm wider, while the height of BMW 3 series is 2 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 300 litres | 300 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
300 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10 meters | 10.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the BMW 3 series is 0.2 metres less than that of the Rover 200. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`885 | 1`580 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 5200 | no data | |
| Pros and Cons: |
BMW 3 sērija has
|
Rover 200 has
| |