Volkswagen Golf 1986 vs Rover 200 1993
| Body: | Hatchback | Cabrio | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 1.6 Diesel | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Diesel (Volkswagen Golf) engines typically outperform gasoline engines in terms of fuel efficiency and low-end torque. This makes them more economical and better suited for towing or long-distance travel. However, gasoline (Rover 200) engines mostly are lighter, quieter, and offer better acceleration and responsiveness, especially in smaller vehicles. For more information, see the article "Diesel or Petrol: Fuel Economy and Key Differences." | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 54 HP | 122 HP | |
| Torque: | 100 NM | 138 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 18.7 seconds | 8.9 seconds | |
|
Rover 200 is a more dynamic driving. Volkswagen Golf engine produces 68 HP less power than Rover 200, whereas torque is 38 NM less than Rover 200. Due to the lower power, Volkswagen Golf reaches 100 km/h speed 9.8 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.0 | 8.5 | |
|
The Volkswagen Golf is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Volkswagen Golf consumes 2.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Rover 200, which means that by driving the Volkswagen Golf over 15,000 km in a year you can save 375 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 910 km in combined cycle | 640 km in combined cycle | |
| Volkswagen Golf 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: | 3.98 m | 4.22 m | |
| Width: | 1.66 m | 1.68 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.39 m | |
|
Volkswagen Golf is smaller, but slightly higher. Volkswagen Golf is 24 cm shorter than the Rover 200, 2 cm narrower, while the height of Volkswagen Golf is 3 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 330 litres | 300 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
1145 litres | no data | |
|
Volkswagen Golf has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, The Rover 200 may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.5 meters | 10.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volkswagen Golf is 0.3 metres more than that of the Rover 200. | |||
| Gross weight: | 1`465 kg | 1`580 kg | |
| Net weight: | 935 kg | 1`135 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 530 kg | 445 kg | |
| Volkswagen Golf load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 16 procentiem more than Rover 200. Therefore, Volkswagen Golf is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 1000 | no data | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volkswagen Golf has
|
Rover 200 has
| |