Rover 200 1993 vs Mercedes SLK 1996
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 122 HP | 136 HP | |
| Torque: | 138 NM | 190 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.9 seconds | 9.3 seconds | |
| Rover 200 engine produces 14 HP less power than Mercedes SLK, whereas torque is 52 NM less than Mercedes SLK. Despite less power, Rover 200 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.4 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.5 | 9.1 | |
|
The Rover 200 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Rover 200 consumes 0.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mercedes SLK, which means that by driving the Rover 200 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 90 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 53 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 640 km in combined cycle | 580 km in combined cycle | |
| Rover 200 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Rover 200) have better traction on slippery roads and when climbing hills, better fuel economy, and are less expensive to purchase. On the disadvantage side, FWD cars usually have less towing capacity, poorer acceleration and harder handling. Rear-wheel drive cars (Mercedes SLK) have better handling on dry roads, better acceleration, more even weight distribution and more fun to drive. RWD is also better for towing large loads. The cons of rear-wheel drive are less interior and trunk space and more difficulty maneuvering in wet and snowy conditions. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.22 m | 4.00 m | |
| Width: | 1.68 m | 1.72 m | |
| Height: | 1.39 m | 1.29 m | |
| Rover 200 is 22 cm longer than the Mercedes SLK, 4 cm narrower, while the height of Rover 200 is 10 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 300 litres | 145 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 348 litres | |
|
Rover 200 has more luggage capacity. Rover 200 has 155 litres more trunk space than the Mercedes SLK. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.2 meters | 10.5 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Rover 200 is 0.3 metres less than that of the Mercedes SLK. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`580 | 1`530 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | high | |
| Average price (€): | no data | 3000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Rover 200 has
|
Mercedes SLK has
| |