Rover 400 1990 vs Volvo 850 1992
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
| Gearbox: | Manual/Automatic | Manual/Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engines: | 1.4 - 2.0 (petrol, diesel) | 2.3 - 2.4 (petrol) | |
| Both cars are available with petrol engines. Rover 400 is available also with diesel engines. Diesel engines typically offer better fuel efficiency and higher torque compared to other engine types. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 67 - 200 HP | 140 - 226 HP | |
| Torque: | 121 - 237 NM | 206 - 300 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.4 - 12.5 seconds | 7.4 - 11 seconds | |
| Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.6 - 8.9 | 9.1 - 9.7 | |
|
Rover 400 petrol engines consumes on average 1.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than Volvo 850. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.37 m | 4.66 m | |
| Width: | 1.68 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.40 m | 1.40 m | |
|
Rover 400 is smaller. Rover 400 is 29 cm shorter than the Volvo 850, 8 cm narrower the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 410 litres | 445 litres | |
|
Volvo 850 has more luggage space. Rover 400 has 35 litres less trunk space than the Volvo 850. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.2 meters | 10.2 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | ~ 1`560 | ~ 1`600 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | above average | |
| Average price (€): | no data | 1200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Rover 400 has
|
Volvo 850 has
| |