1996 Rover 220 vs. 2009 Ford Ecosport
To start off, 2009 Ford Ecosport is newer by 13 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1996 Rover 220. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1996 Rover 220 would be higher. At 2,000 cc (4 cylinders), 2009 Ford Ecosport is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Ford Ecosport (143 HP) has 40 more horse power than 1996 Rover 220. (103 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Ford Ecosport should accelerate faster than 1996 Rover 220.
Because 2009 Ford Ecosport is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1996 Rover 220. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2009 Ford Ecosport will offer significantly more control. 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. 2009 Ford Ecosport has automatic transmission and 1996 Rover 220 has manual transmission. 1996 Rover 220 will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2009 Ford Ecosport will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 1996 Rover 220 | 2009 Ford Ecosport | |
| Make | Rover | Ford |
| Model | 220 | Ecosport |
| Year Released | 1996 | 2009 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1993 cc | 2000 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 103 HP | 143 HP |
| Fuel Type | Diesel | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Front | 4WD |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 3980 mm | 4228 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1690 mm | 1980 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1430 mm | 1679 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2510 mm | 2490 mm |
