1965 Austin-Healey 3000 Mk III vs. 1995 Rover 200
To start off, 1995 Rover 200 is newer by 30 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1965 Austin-Healey 3000 Mk III. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1965 Austin-Healey 3000 Mk III would be higher. At 2,912 cc (6 cylinders), 1965 Austin-Healey 3000 Mk III is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1995 Rover 200 (197 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 51 more horse power than 1965 Austin-Healey 3000 Mk III. (146 HP @ 5250 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1995 Rover 200 should accelerate faster than 1965 Austin-Healey 3000 Mk III. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1995 Rover 200 weights approximately 5 kg more than 1965 Austin-Healey 3000 Mk III. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Let's talk about torque, 1995 Rover 200 (233 Nm @ 2100 RPM) has 67 more torque (in Nm) than 1965 Austin-Healey 3000 Mk III. (166 Nm @ 3500 RPM). This means 1995 Rover 200 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1965 Austin-Healey 3000 Mk III.
Compare all specifications:
| 1965 Austin-Healey 3000 Mk III | 1995 Rover 200 | |
| Make | Austin-Healey | Rover |
| Model | 3000 Mk III | 200 |
| Year Released | 1965 | 1995 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2912 cc | 1994 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 146 HP | 197 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5250 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Torque | 166 Nm | 233 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3500 RPM | 2100 RPM |
| Engine Bore Size | 83.4 mm | 84.5 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 88.9 mm | 89 mm |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 4 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 1180 kg | 1185 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4010 mm | 4230 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1540 mm | 1690 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1250 mm | 1410 mm |
