Rover 400 1997 vs Mazda 626 1997
Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
---|---|---|---|
Engine: | 1.4 Petrol | 1.8 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
Power: | 103 HP | 90 HP | |
Torque: | 127 NM | 145 NM | |
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.5 seconds | 12.6 seconds | |
Rover 400 is more dynamic to drive. Rover 400 engine produces 13 HP more power than Mazda 626, but torque is 18 NM less than Mazda 626. Thanks to more power Rover 400 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.8 | 7.6 | |
Real fuel consumption: | 8.2 l/100km | 8.3 l/100km | |
The Rover 400 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Rover 400 consumes 0.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 626, which means that by driving the Rover 400 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 120 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Rover 400 consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 626. | |||
Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 64 litres | |
Full fuel tank distance: | 800 km in combined cycle | 840 km in combined cycle | |
1050 km on highway | 1030 km on highway | ||
670 km with real consumption | 770 km with real consumption | ||
Dimensions | |||
Length: | 4.32 m | 4.58 m | |
Width: | 1.70 m | 1.71 m | |
Height: | 1.39 m | 1.43 m | |
Rover 400 is smaller. Rover 400 is 26 cm shorter than the Mazda 626, 1 cm narrower, while the height of Rover 400 is 4 cm lower. | |||
Trunk capacity: | 370 litres | 502 litres | |
Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
7320 litres | no data | |
Mazda 626 has more luggage space. Rover 400 has 132 litres less trunk space than the Mazda 626. | |||
Turning diameter: | 10.3 meters | 10.4 meters | |
The turning circle of the Rover 400 is 0.1 metres less than that of the Mazda 626. | |||
Gross weight (kg): | 1`550 | 1`680 | |
Safety: | no data | no data | |
Quality: | no data | above average | |
Average price (€): | no data | 1000 | |
Pros and Cons: |
Rover 400 has
|
Mazda 626 has
| |