Rover 400 1998 vs Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution 1998
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 115 HP | 280 HP | |
| Torque: | 143 NM | 372.6 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.7 seconds | n/a seconds | |
| Rover 400 engine produces 165 HP less power than Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution, whereas torque is 229.6 NM less than Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.8 | 10.0 | |
|
The Rover 400 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Rover 400 consumes 1.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution, which means that by driving the Rover 400 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 180 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 50 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 620 km in combined cycle | 500 km in combined cycle | |
| Rover 400 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.49 m | 4.35 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.77 m | |
| Height: | 1.39 m | 1.42 m | |
| Rover 400 is 14 cm longer than the Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution, 7 cm narrower, while the height of Rover 400 is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 470 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
810 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.3 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Rover 400 is 0.7 metres less than that of the Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution, which means Rover 400 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`640 | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | no data | 7600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Rover 400 has
|
Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution has
| |