Rover 200 1995 vs Mazda 3 2013
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 | 1.5 - 2.5 | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 75 - 145 HP | 100 - 187 HP | |
| Torque: | 117 - 210 NM | 144 - 380 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7.5 - 13.3 seconds | 8.1 - 13.6 seconds | |
| In general, Mazda 3 are available with more powerful and dynamic engines than Rover 200. Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.6 - 7.8 | 4.1 - 7.6 | |
|
Rover 200 petrol engines consumes on average 1.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than Mazda 3. On average, Rover 200 equipped with diesel engines consume 1.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.97 m | 4.47 m | |
| Width: | 1.69 m | 1.79 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.45 m | |
|
Rover 200 is smaller. Rover 200 is 50 cm shorter than the Mazda 3, 10 cm narrower, while the height of Rover 200 is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 304 litres | 364 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1086 litres | 1263 litres | |
|
Mazda 3 has more luggage space. Rover 200 has 60 litres less trunk space than the Mazda 3. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mazda 3 (by 177 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Rover 200 is 0.2 metres less than that of the Mazda 3. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | ~ 1`527 | ~ 1`864 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | above average | |
| Average price (€): | no data | 7200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
|
Mazda 3 has
| |