Moskvitch 2141 1987 vs Rover 400 1997
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.5 Petrol | 1.4 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 72 HP | 103 HP | |
| Torque: | 106 NM | 127 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 18 seconds | 11.5 seconds | |
|
Rover 400 is a more dynamic driving. Moskvitch 2141 engine produces 31 HP less power than Rover 400, whereas torque is 21 NM less than Rover 400. Due to the lower power, Moskvitch 2141 reaches 100 km/h speed 6.5 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.9 | 6.8 | |
|
The Rover 400 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Moskvitch 2141 consumes 1.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Rover 400, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Moskvitch 2141 could require 165 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 690 km in combined cycle | 800 km in combined cycle | |
| Rover 400 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.35 m | 4.32 m | |
| Width: | 1.69 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.40 m | 1.39 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Moskvitch 2141 is 3 cm longer than the Rover 400, 1 cm narrower, while the height of Moskvitch 2141 is 1 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 370 litres | 370 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 7320 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | no data | 10.3 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`465 | 1`550 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | no data | no data | |
| Pros and Cons: |
|
Rover 400 has
| |