Rover 400 1996 vs Mitsubishi Galant 1996
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.8 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 112 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 145 NM | 179 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.8 seconds | 9.7 seconds | |
|
Mitsubishi Galant is a more dynamic driving. Rover 400 engine produces 38 HP less power than Mitsubishi Galant, whereas torque is 34 NM less than Mitsubishi Galant. Due to the lower power, Rover 400 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.1 | 8.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.9 l/100km | 9.2 l/100km | |
|
The Rover 400 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Rover 400 consumes 1.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Galant, which means that by driving the Rover 400 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 180 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Rover 400 consumes 1.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Galant. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 64 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 770 km in combined cycle | 770 km in combined cycle | |
| 1010 km on highway | 1000 km on highway | ||
| 690 km with real consumption | 690 km with real consumption | ||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 390'000 km | 350'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Rover 400 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 10 years | 23 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Rover 25, Rover 200, Rover 45 | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Volvo V40, Volvo S40, Mitsubishi Carisma | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mitsubishi Galant might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.49 m | 4.63 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.74 m | |
| Height: | 1.39 m | 1.42 m | |
|
Rover 400 is smaller. Rover 400 is 14 cm shorter than the Mitsubishi Galant, 4 cm narrower, while the height of Rover 400 is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 470 litres | 470 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
810 litres | 1400 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.3 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Rover 400 is 0.5 metres less than that of the Mitsubishi Galant, which means Rover 400 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`640 | 1`850 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | average | |
| Average price (€): | no data | 2000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Rover 400 has
|
Mitsubishi Galant has
| |