2000 Citroen Xanae vs. 1996 Rover 200
To start off, 2000 Citroen Xanae is newer by 4 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 1,587 cc (4 cylinders), 2000 Citroen Xanae is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1996 Rover 200 (102 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 44 more horse power than 2000 Citroen Xanae. (58 HP @ 4600 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1996 Rover 200 should accelerate faster than 2000 Citroen Xanae. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2000 Citroen Xanae weights approximately 104 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, 2000 Citroen Xanae (142 Nm) has 15 more torque (in Nm) than 1996 Rover 200. (127 Nm). This means 2000 Citroen Xanae will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1996 Rover 200.
Compare all specifications:
2000 Citroen Xanae | 1996 Rover 200 | |
Make | Citroen | Rover |
Model | Xanae | 200 |
Year Released | 2000 | 1996 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1587 cc | 1396 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 58 HP | 102 HP |
Engine RPM | 4600 RPM | 6000 RPM |
Torque | 142 Nm | 127 Nm |
Drive Type | Front | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Vehicle Weight | 1134 kg | 1030 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4200 mm | 3980 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1710 mm | 1700 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1410 mm | 1430 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2550 mm | 2510 mm |