Rover 200 1996 vs Toyota Corolla 1997
| Body: | Hatchback | Sedan | |
|---|---|---|---|
| The hatchback generally has more luggage space thanks to a larger trunk door opening and the ability to convert the rear of the passenger compartment into luggage space. Sedans tend to be quieter than hatchbacks, due to a more isolated rear area. | |||
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 86 HP | 72 HP | |
| Torque: | 170 NM | 131 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.9 seconds | 14.4 seconds | |
|
Rover 200 is more dynamic to drive. Rover 200 engine produces 14 HP more power than Toyota Corolla, whereas torque is 39 NM more than Toyota Corolla. Thanks to more power Rover 200 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.5 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.6 | 6.3 | |
|
The Rover 200 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Rover 200 consumes 0.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Toyota Corolla, which means that by driving the Rover 200 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 105 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 50 litres | 50 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 890 km in combined cycle | 790 km in combined cycle | |
| 1110 km on highway | 960 km on highway | ||
| Rover 200 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 370'000 km | 350'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 18 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Rover 400 | Used also on Toyota Carina E | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Toyota Corolla might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Rover 200 engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.97 m | 4.30 m | |
| Width: | 1.69 m | 1.69 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.38 m | |
| Rover 200 is 33 cm shorter than the Toyota Corolla, width is practically the same , while the height of Rover 200 is 4 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 304 litres | 390 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1086 litres | no data | |
|
Toyota Corolla has more luggage space. Rover 200 has 86 litres less trunk space than the Toyota Corolla. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 9.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Rover 200 is 0.8 metres more than that of the Toyota Corolla, which means Rover 200 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`600 | 1`650 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | high | |
| Average price (€): | no data | 1200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Rover 200 has
|
Toyota Corolla has
| |