Rover 200 1990 vs Mazda 323 1994
Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
---|---|---|---|
Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.5 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
Power: | 112 HP | 90 HP | |
Torque: | 138 NM | 134 NM | |
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.6 seconds | 11.9 seconds | |
Rover 200 is more dynamic to drive. Rover 200 engine produces 22 HP more power than Mazda 323, whereas torque is 4 NM more than Mazda 323. Thanks to more power Rover 200 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.3 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.9 | 7.2 | |
The Mazda 323 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Rover 200 consumes 1.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 323, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Rover 200 could require 255 litres more fuel. | |||
Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 55 litres | |
Full fuel tank distance: | 610 km in combined cycle | 760 km in combined cycle | |
Mazda 323 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Dimensions | |||
Length: | 4.22 m | 4.24 m | |
Width: | 1.68 m | 1.70 m | |
Height: | 1.40 m | 1.36 m | |
Rover 200 is smaller, but slightly higher. Rover 200 is 2 cm shorter than the Mazda 323, 2 cm narrower, while the height of Rover 200 is 4 cm higher. | |||
Trunk capacity: | 352 litres | 300 litres | |
Rover 200 has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, Rover 200 has 52 litres more trunk space than the Mazda 323. The Mazda 323 may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. | |||
Turning diameter: | 10.2 meters | 10.2 meters | |
Gross weight (kg): | 1`500 | 1`575 | |
Safety: | no data | no data | |
Quality: | no data | above average | |
Average price (€): | no data | 800 | |
Pros and Cons: |
Rover 200 has
|
Mazda 323 has
| |