Opel Omega 1989 vs Rover 400 1990
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
| Gearbox: | Manual/Automatic | Manual/Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Opel Omega is available with rear wheel drive, while Rover 400 can be equipped with front wheel drive. | |||
| Engines: | 2.0 - 3.6 | 1.4 - 2.0 | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 73 - 377 HP | 67 - 200 HP | |
| Torque: | 138 - 568 NM | 121 - 237 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 5.4 - 19 seconds | 8.4 - 12.5 seconds | |
| Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.9 - 11.0 | 5.6 - 8.9 | |
|
Opel Omega petrol engines consumes on average 1.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than Rover 400. On average, Opel Omega equipped with diesel engines consume 1.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Rover 400. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.74 m | 4.37 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.68 m | |
| Height: | 1.44 m | 1.40 m | |
|
Opel Omega is larger. Opel Omega is 37 cm longer than the Rover 400, 8 cm wider, while the height of Opel Omega is 4 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 520 litres | 410 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
870 litres | no data | |
|
Opel Omega has more luggage capacity. Opel Omega has 110 litres more trunk space than the Rover 400. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.9 meters | 10.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Opel Omega is 0.7 metres more than that of the Rover 400, which means Opel Omega can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | ~ 1`942 | ~ 1`560 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | below average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 3000 | no data | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Opel Omega has
|
Rover 400 has
| |