1995 BMW CLS vs. 1968 Rover 2000
To start off, 1995 BMW CLS is newer by 27 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1968 Rover 2000. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1968 Rover 2000 would be higher. At 3,532 cc (8 cylinders), 1968 Rover 2000 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1995 BMW CLS (350 HP @ 4800 RPM) has 208 more horse power than 1968 Rover 2000. (142 HP @ 5000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1995 BMW CLS should accelerate faster than 1968 Rover 2000.
Both vehicles are rear wheel drive (RWD) - it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, both vehicles do the job better than front 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, 1968 Rover 2000 (272 Nm) has 12 more torque (in Nm) than 1995 BMW CLS. (260 Nm). This means 1968 Rover 2000 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1995 BMW CLS.
Compare all specifications:
1995 BMW CLS | 1968 Rover 2000 | |
Make | BMW | Rover |
Model | CLS | 2000 |
Year Released | 1995 | 1968 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3001 cc | 3532 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 350 HP | 142 HP |
Engine RPM | 4800 RPM | 5000 RPM |
Torque | 260 Nm | 272 Nm |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
Vehicle Width | 1360 mm | 1690 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1360 mm | 1400 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2710 mm | 2640 mm |