Rover 75 2004 vs Rover 75 2004
| Body: | Estate car / wagon | Sedan | |
|---|---|---|---|
| The wagon generally has more cargo space due to a larger trunk door opening, a roof that extends as far back as possible, and the ability to convert the rear of the passenger compartment into cargo space. Sedans tend to be quieter than wagons due to a more isolated rear area. | |||
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
| Engine: | 1.8 Petrol | 1.8 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 120 HP | |
| Torque: | 215 NM | 160 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.8 seconds | 13.2 seconds | |
|
Rover 75 2004 is more dynamic to drive. Rover 75 2004 engine produces 30 HP more power than Rover 75 2004, whereas torque is 55 NM more than Rover 75 2004. Thanks to more power Rover 75 2004 reaches 100 km/h speed 2.4 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.9 | 9.4 | |
|
The Rover 75 2004 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Rover 75 2004 consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Rover 75 2004, which means that by driving the Rover 75 2004 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 75 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 65 litres | 65 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 730 km in combined cycle | 690 km in combined cycle | |
| 980 km on highway | 860 km on highway | ||
| Rover 75 2004 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 300'000 km | 420'000 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 75 2004 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 3 years | 11 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Rover 25, Rover 45 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.79 m | 4.75 m | |
| Width: | 1.78 m | 1.78 m | |
| Height: | 1.39 m | 1.39 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Rover 75 2004 is 4 cm longer than the Rover 75 2004, width is practically the same also the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 400 litres | 432 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1222 litres | 432 litres | |
| Despite its longer length, Rover 75 2004 has 32 litres less trunk space than the Rover 75 2004. This could mean that the Rover 75 2004 uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Rover 75 2004 (by 790 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.4 meters | 11.4 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 2`000 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 1400 | 1200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Rover 75 has
|
Rover 75 has
| |