Rover 200 1998 vs Seat Toledo 1995
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.4 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 75 HP | 75 HP | |
| Torque: | 117 NM | 125 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13.3 seconds | 13.3 seconds | |
| Rover 200 and Seat Toledo have the same engine power, but Rover 200 torque is 8 NM less than Seat Toledo. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.8 | 7.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.0 l/100km | 8.1 l/100km | |
|
The Rover 200 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Rover 200 consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Seat Toledo, which means that by driving the Rover 200 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 75 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Rover 200 consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Seat Toledo. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 50 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 730 km in combined cycle | 750 km in combined cycle | |
| 920 km on highway | 910 km on highway | ||
| 620 km with real consumption | 670 km with real consumption | ||
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`460 | 1`000 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | low | |
| Average price (€): | no data | 1000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Rover 200 has
|
| |