Opel Omega 1989 vs Rover 400 1991
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.3 Diesel | 1.9 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 101 HP | 67 HP | |
| Torque: | 215 NM | 121 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 15.5 seconds | n/a seconds | |
| Opel Omega engine produces 34 HP more power than Rover 400, whereas torque is 94 NM more than Rover 400. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.2 | 5.6 | |
|
The Rover 400 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Opel Omega consumes 1.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Rover 400, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Opel Omega could require 240 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 75 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1040 km in combined cycle | 980 km in combined cycle | |
| Opel Omega gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Rover 400) have better traction on slippery roads and when climbing hills, better fuel economy, and are less expensive to purchase. On the disadvantage side, FWD cars usually have less towing capacity, poorer acceleration and harder handling. Rear-wheel drive cars (Opel Omega) have better handling on dry roads, better acceleration, more even weight distribution and more fun to drive. RWD is also better for towing large loads. The cons of rear-wheel drive are less interior and trunk space and more difficulty maneuvering in wet and snowy conditions. | |||
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 | no data | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`895 | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | below average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 3000 | no data | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Opel Omega has
|
Rover 400 has
| |