1980 Mitsubishi Sigma vs. 2006 Rover 75
To start off, 2006 Rover 75 is newer by 26 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1980 Mitsubishi Sigma. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1980 Mitsubishi Sigma would be higher. At 4,601 cc (8 cylinders), 2006 Rover 75 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Rover 75 (256 HP) has 170 more horse power than 1980 Mitsubishi Sigma. (86 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2006 Rover 75 should accelerate faster than 1980 Mitsubishi Sigma.
Because 1980 Mitsubishi Sigma is rear wheel drive (RWD), it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, it will be much easier to do with 1980 Mitsubishi Sigma. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2006 Rover 75, being front wheel drive (FWD), will offer much better control with better grip. With that said, do keep in mind that many other factors such as speed and the wear on your tires can also have significant impact on traction and control. Let's talk about torque, 2006 Rover 75 (245 Nm @ 4000 RPM) has 100 more torque (in Nm) than 1980 Mitsubishi Sigma. (145 Nm @ 2400 RPM). This means 2006 Rover 75 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1980 Mitsubishi Sigma.
Compare all specifications:
| 1980 Mitsubishi Sigma | 2006 Rover 75 | |
| Make | Mitsubishi | Rover |
| Model | Sigma | 75 |
| Year Released | 1980 | 2006 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1995 cc | 4601 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 86 HP | 256 HP |
| Torque | 145 Nm | 245 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2400 RPM | 4000 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline - Premium |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Vehicle Length | 4460 mm | 4800 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1660 mm | 1780 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1370 mm | 1440 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2520 mm | 2750 mm |
