Seat Toledo 1996 vs Rover 200 1996
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 101 HP | 112 HP | |
| Torque: | 140 NM | 145 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.3 seconds | 9.9 seconds | |
|
Rover 200 is a more dynamic driving. Seat Toledo engine produces 11 HP less power than Rover 200, whereas torque is 5 NM less than Rover 200. Due to the lower power, Seat Toledo reaches 100 km/h speed 1.4 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.8 | 7.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.9 l/100km | 8.3 l/100km | |
|
By specification Seat Toledo consumes 0.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Rover 200, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Seat Toledo could require 90 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Seat Toledo consumes 0.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Rover 200. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 50 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 700 km in combined cycle | 690 km in combined cycle | |
| 900 km on highway | 890 km on highway | ||
| 690 km with real consumption | 600 km with real consumption | ||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.32 m | 3.97 m | |
| Width: | 1.66 m | 1.69 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.42 m | |
| Seat Toledo is 35 cm longer than the Rover 200, 3 cm narrower the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 304 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1086 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.5 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Seat Toledo is 0.1 metres more than that of the Rover 200. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`200 | 1`510 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | low | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 1000 | no data | |
| Pros and Cons: |
|
Rover 200 has
| |