Rover 200 1990 vs Mazda 323 1994
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
| Gearbox: | Manual/Automatic | Manual/Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engines: | 1.4 - 2.0 (petrol, diesel) | 1.3 - 2.0 (petrol) | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 75 - 200 HP | 73 - 147 HP | |
| Torque: | 117 - 237 NM | 108 - 183 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 6.5 - 12.5 seconds | 9.4 - 12.5 seconds | |
| Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.9 - 8.9 | 7.2 - 9.6 | |
|
Rover 200 petrol engines consumes on average 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than Mazda 323. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.22 m | 4.21 m | |
| Width: | 1.68 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.40 m | 1.37 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Rover 200 is 1 cm longer than the Mazda 323, 2 cm narrower, while the height of Rover 200 is 3 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 352 litres | 300 litres | |
|
Rover 200 has more luggage capacity. Rover 200 has 52 litres more trunk space than the Mazda 323. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.2 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Rover 200 is 0.4 metres less than that of the Mazda 323, which means Rover 200 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | ~ 1`569 | ~ 1`513 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | above average | |
| Average price (€): | no data | 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Rover 200 has
|
Mazda 323 has
| |