Rover 200 1995 vs Seat Toledo 1995
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 | 1.6 - 2.0 | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 75 - 145 HP | 64 - 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 117 - 210 NM | 124 - 235 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7.5 - 13.3 seconds | 8.4 - 17.9 seconds | |
| Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.6 - 7.8 | 5.1 - 9.7 | |
|
Rover 200 petrol engines consumes on average 1 litres less fuel per 100 km than Seat Toledo. On average, Rover 200 equipped with diesel engines consume 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Seat Toledo. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.97 m | 4.32 m | |
| Width: | 1.69 m | 1.66 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.42 m | |
| Rover 200 is 35 cm shorter than the Seat Toledo, 3 cm wider the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 304 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1086 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 10.5 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Rover 200 is 0.1 metres less than that of the Seat Toledo. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | ~ 1`527 | ~ 1`120 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | low | |
| Average price (€): | no data | 1000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Rover 200 has
|
| |