Rover 200 1996 vs Mazda 323 1989
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 1.7 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 86 HP | 56 HP | |
| Torque: | 170 NM | 110 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.9 seconds | 16.5 seconds | |
|
Rover 200 is more dynamic to drive. Rover 200 engine produces 30 HP more power than Mazda 323, whereas torque is 60 NM more than Mazda 323. Thanks to more power Rover 200 reaches 100 km/h speed 3.6 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.6 | 5.9 | |
|
The Rover 200 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Rover 200 consumes 0.3 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 45 litres of fuel. | |||
| 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`600 | 1`550 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | above average | |
| Average price (€): | no data | 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Rover 200 has
|
| |