Mazda 323 1989 vs Rover 200 1990
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.8 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 106 HP | 112 HP | |
| Torque: | 150 NM | 138 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.7 seconds | 9.5 seconds | |
|
Rover 200 is a more dynamic driving. Mazda 323 engine produces 6 HP less power than Rover 200, but torque is 12 NM more than Rover 200. Due to the lower power, Mazda 323 reaches 100 km/h speed 2.2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.2 | 8.6 | |
|
The Rover 200 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Mazda 323 consumes 0.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Rover 200, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda 323 could require 90 litres more fuel. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.00 m | 4.22 m | |
| Width: | 1.67 m | 1.68 m | |
| Height: | 1.39 m | 1.40 m | |
|
Mazda 323 is smaller. Mazda 323 is 23 cm shorter than the Rover 200, width is practically the same , while the height of Mazda 323 is 1 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 309 litres | 352 litres | |
|
Rover 200 has more luggage space. Mazda 323 has 43 litres less trunk space than the Rover 200. | |||
| Turning diameter: | no data | 10.2 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`585 | 1`580 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | above average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 800 | no data | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 323 has
|
Rover 200 has
| |