Rover 25 1999 vs Mazda 2 2003
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
| Gearbox: | Manual/Automatic | Manual/Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engines: | 1.1 - 2.0 | 1.2 - 1.6 | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 75 - 145 HP | 68 - 100 HP | |
| Torque: | 95 - 240 NM | 110 - 160 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7.8 - 13.5 seconds | 11.4 - 16 seconds | |
| Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.1 - 8.2 | 4.5 - 7.1 | |
|
Rover 25 petrol engines consumes on average 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than Mazda 2. On average, Rover 25 equipped with diesel engines consume 0.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 2. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.99 m | 3.92 m | |
| Width: | 1.69 m | 1.68 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.54 m | |
|
Rover 25 is larger, but lower. Rover 25 is 7 cm longer than the Mazda 2, 1 cm wider, while the height of Rover 25 is 12 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 304 litres | 267 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1086 litres | 1044 litres | |
|
Rover 25 has more luggage capacity. Rover 25 has 37 litres more trunk space than the Mazda 2. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Rover 25 (by 42 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10 meters | 9.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Rover 25 is 0.2 metres more than that of the Mazda 2. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | ~ 1`512 | ~ 1`512 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | no data | high | |
| Average price (€): | 1200 | 1400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Rover 25 has
|
Mazda 2 has
| |