Rover 200 1998 vs Mazda 323 1989
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.4 Petrol | 1.3 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 75 HP | 73 HP | |
| Torque: | 117 NM | 105 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13.3 seconds | 12 seconds | |
| Rover 200 engine produces 2 HP more power than Mazda 323, whereas torque is 12 NM more than Mazda 323. Despite the higher power, Rover 200 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.8 | 6.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.0 l/100km | 7.5 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 323 is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Rover 200 consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 323, which means that by driving the Rover 200 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 15 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Rover 200 consumes 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 323. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.97 m | 4.00 m | |
| Width: | 1.69 m | 1.67 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.38 m | |
| Rover 200 is 3 cm shorter than the Mazda 323, 2 cm wider, while the height of Rover 200 is 4 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 304 litres | 309 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1086 litres | no data | |
| Rover 200 has 5 litres less trunk space than the Mazda 323. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | no data | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`460 | 1`440 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | above average | |
| Average price (€): | no data | 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
|
Mazda 323 has
| |