Rover 75 2002 vs Rover 45 1999
| Body: | Sedan | Hatchback | |
|---|---|---|---|
| The hatchback generally has more luggage space thanks to a larger trunk door opening and the ability to convert the rear of the passenger compartment into luggage space. Sedans tend to be quieter than hatchbacks, due to a more isolated rear area. | |||
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 1.8 Petrol | 1.8 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 117 HP | |
| Torque: | 215 NM | 160 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.6 seconds | 9.3 seconds | |
| Rover 75 engine produces 33 HP more power than Rover 45, whereas torque is 55 NM more than Rover 45. Despite the higher power, Rover 75 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.0 | 7.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.4 l/100km | 7.1 l/100km | |
|
The Rover 45 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Rover 75 consumes 0.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Rover 45, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Rover 75 could require 135 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Rover 75 consumes 2.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Rover 45. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 65 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 810 km in combined cycle | 770 km in combined cycle | |
| 1060 km on highway | 960 km on highway | ||
| 690 km with real consumption | 770 km with real consumption | ||
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 45 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 75, Rover 25 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Rover 45 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.75 m | 4.36 m | |
| Width: | 1.78 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.43 m | 1.39 m | |
|
Rover 75 is larger. Rover 75 is 39 cm longer than the Rover 45, 8 cm wider, while the height of Rover 75 is 4 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 432 litres | 380 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
432 litres | 717 litres | |
| Rover 75 has 52 litres more trunk space than the Rover 45. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Rover 45 (by 285 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.4 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Rover 75 is 1 metres more than that of the Rover 45, which means Rover 75 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`960 | 1`640 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 1800 | 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Rover 75 has
|
Rover 45 has
| |