1982 Austin Ambassador vs. 2006 Rover 25
To start off, 2006 Rover 25 is newer by 24 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1982 Austin Ambassador. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1982 Austin Ambassador would be higher. Both 1982 Austin Ambassador and 2006 Rover 25 are equipped with a 1,994 cc engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Rover 25 (100 HP @ 4200 RPM) has 9 more horse power than 1982 Austin Ambassador. (91 HP @ 4900 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2006 Rover 25 should accelerate faster than 1982 Austin Ambassador. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1982 Austin Ambassador weights approximately 85 kg more than 2006 Rover 25.
Both vehicles are front wheel drive (FWD). Which offers better traction when its slippery than rear wheel drive vehicles. 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 25 (240 Nm @ 2000 RPM) has 85 more torque (in Nm) than 1982 Austin Ambassador. (155 Nm @ 2750 RPM). This means 2006 Rover 25 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1982 Austin Ambassador.
Compare all specifications:
| 1982 Austin Ambassador | 2006 Rover 25 | |
| Make | Austin | Rover |
| Model | Ambassador | 25 |
| Year Released | 1982 | 2006 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1994 cc | 1994 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 91 HP | 100 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4900 RPM | 4200 RPM |
| Torque | 155 Nm | 240 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2750 RPM | 2000 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Diesel |
| Drive Type | Front | Front |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Vehicle Weight | 1215 kg | 1130 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4560 mm | 4000 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1740 mm | 1690 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1410 mm | 1430 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2680 mm | 2510 mm |
