Rover 75 2004 vs Nissan Pathfinder 1997
| Body: | Estate car / wagon | Crossover / SUV | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Crossovers and SUVs have better off-road capabilities (higher ground clearance, can have 4x4 drive), they are preferable for driving on unpaved roads and rural areas. Also, the driver's seating position is higher in a crossover or SUVs, which provides better visibility also in city. This usually comes at the cost of higher fuel consumption, increased weight and higher maintenance costs. | |||
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
| Engine: | 2.5 Petrol | 2.7 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | no data | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 177 HP | 131 HP | |
| Torque: | 240 NM | 279 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.2 seconds | n/a seconds | |
| Rover 75 engine produces 46 HP more power than Nissan Pathfinder, but torque is 39 NM less than Nissan Pathfinder. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 10.6 | 11.5 | |
|
The Rover 75 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Rover 75 consumes 0.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Pathfinder, which means that by driving the Rover 75 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 135 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 65 litres | 80 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 610 km in combined cycle | 690 km in combined cycle | |
| 860 km on highway | 800 km on highway | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 350'000 km | 480'000 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 Nissan Pathfinder engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 10 years | 6 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Land Rover Freelander, Kia Carnival, Rover 400 | Used only for this car | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Rover 75 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Rover 75 engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.79 m | 4.53 m | |
| Width: | 1.78 m | 1.82 m | |
| Height: | 1.39 m | 1.75 m | |
| Rover 75 is 26 cm longer than the Nissan Pathfinder, 4 cm narrower, while the height of Rover 75 is 36 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 400 litres | 435 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1222 litres | 1670 litres | |
|
Nissan Pathfinder has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Rover 75 has 35 litres less trunk space than the Nissan Pathfinder. This could mean that the Rover 75 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 Nissan Pathfinder (by 448 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.4 meters | no data | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`050 | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 1600 | 3600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Rover 75 has
|
Nissan Pathfinder has
| |