Rover 75 2004 vs Skoda Superb 2003
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.5 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 116 HP | 163 HP | |
| Torque: | 260 NM | 350 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.7 seconds | 10.4 seconds | |
|
Skoda Superb is a more dynamic driving. Rover 75 engine produces 47 HP less power than Skoda Superb, whereas torque is 90 NM less than Skoda Superb. Due to the lower power, Rover 75 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.8 | 7.7 | |
|
The Rover 75 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Rover 75 consumes 1.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Skoda Superb, which means that by driving the Rover 75 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 285 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 65 litres | 62 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1120 km in combined cycle | 800 km in combined cycle | |
| 1380 km on highway | 1080 km on highway | ||
| Rover 75 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.75 m | 4.80 m | |
| Width: | 1.78 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.39 m | 1.47 m | |
| Rover 75 is 5 cm shorter than the Skoda Superb, 2 cm wider, while the height of Rover 75 is 8 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 432 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
432 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.4 meters | 11.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Rover 75 is 0.4 metres less than that of the Skoda Superb, which means Rover 75 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`030 | 1`600 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | average | |
| Average price (€): | 1400 | 1800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Rover 75 has
|
Skoda Superb has
| |