1996 Rover 200 vs. 2010 Citroen C3
To start off, 2010 Citroen C3 is newer by 14 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1996 Rover 200. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1996 Rover 200 would be higher. At 1,794 cc (4 cylinders), 1996 Rover 200 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1996 Rover 200 (143 HP) has 71 more horse power than 2010 Citroen C3. (72 HP). In normal driving conditions, 1996 Rover 200 should accelerate faster than 2010 Citroen C3. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2010 Citroen C3 weights approximately 151 kg more than 1996 Rover 200.
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, 1996 Rover 200 (174 Nm @ 4000 RPM) has 56 more torque (in Nm) than 2010 Citroen C3. (118 Nm @ 3300 RPM). This means 1996 Rover 200 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2010 Citroen C3.
Compare all specifications:
1996 Rover 200 | 2010 Citroen C3 | |
Make | Rover | Citroen |
Model | 200 | C3 |
Year Released | 1996 | 2010 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1794 cc | 1360 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
Horse Power | 143 HP | 72 HP |
Torque | 174 Nm | 118 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4000 RPM | 3300 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline - Premium |
Drive Type | Front | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
Number of Doors | 3 doors | 3 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1060 kg | 1211 kg |
Vehicle Length | 3980 mm | 3940 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1700 mm | 1710 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1430 mm | 1570 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2510 mm | 2470 mm |