Kia Sephia 1998 vs Rover 400 1996

 
Kia Sephia
1998 - 2003
Rover 400
1996 - 1999
Gearbox: ManualManual
Engine: 1.8 Petrol1.6 Petrol
Camshaft drive: Timing beltTiming belt

Performance

Power: 111 HP112 HP
Torque: 152 NM145 NM
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: 10.3 seconds10.8 seconds
Kia Sephia is more dynamic to drive.
Kia Sephia engine produces 1 HP less power than Rover 400, but torque is 7 NM more than Rover 400. Despite less power, Kia Sephia reaches 100 km/h speed 0.5 seconds faster.

Fuel consumption

Fuel consumption (l/100km): 9.17.1
The Rover 400 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy.
Kia Sephia consumes 2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Rover 400, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Kia Sephia could require 300 litres more fuel.
Fuel tank capacity: 50 litres55 litres
Full fuel tank distance: 540 km in combined cycle770 km in combined cycle
710 km on highway1010 km on highway
Rover 400 gets more mileage on one fuel tank.
Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy.

Engines

Average engine lifespan: 350'000 km390'000 km
Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Rover 400 engine could be longer.
Engine production duration: 11 years10 years
Engine spread: Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Kia Carens, Kia Shuma, Kia ClarusInstalled on at least 3 other car models, including Rover 25, Rover 200, Rover 45
In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts.

Dimensions

Length: 4.43 m4.49 m
Width: 1.71 m1.70 m
Height: 1.42 m1.39 m
Both cars are similar in size. Kia Sephia is 6 cm shorter than the Rover 400, 1 cm wider, while the height of Kia Sephia is 3 cm higher.
Trunk capacity: 370 litres470 litres
Trunk max capacity:
with rear seats folded down
692 litres810 litres
Rover 400 has more luggage space.
Kia Sephia has 100 litres less trunk space than the Rover 400. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Rover 400 (by 118 litres).
Turning diameter: no data10.3 meters
Gross weight (kg): 1`6001`640
Safety: no datano data
Quality:
low
no data
Average price (€): 800no data
Pros and Cons:
    Rover 400 has
    • lower fuel consumption
    • more full fuel tank mileage
    • longer expected engine lifespan
    • roomier boot
    Share these results to social networks or e-mail
    Contact us: info@auto-abc.lv