2000 Ford TS-50 vs. 2006 Rover 75
To start off, 2006 Rover 75 is newer by 6 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2000 Ford TS-50. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2000 Ford TS-50 would be higher. At 4,601 cc (8 cylinders), 2006 Rover 75 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Rover 75 (256 HP) has 128 more horse power than 2000 Ford TS-50. (128 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2006 Rover 75 should accelerate faster than 2000 Ford TS-50.
Because 2000 Ford TS-50 is rear wheel drive (RWD), it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, it will be much easier to do with 2000 Ford TS-50. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2006 Rover 75, being front wheel drive (FWD), will offer much better control with better grip. 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 75 (245 Nm) has 70 more torque (in Nm) than 2000 Ford TS-50. (175 Nm). This means 2006 Rover 75 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2000 Ford TS-50.
Compare all specifications:
| 2000 Ford TS-50 | 2006 Rover 75 | |
| Make | Ford | Rover |
| Model | TS-50 | 75 |
| Year Released | 2000 | 2006 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1989 cc | 4601 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Horse Power | 128 HP | 256 HP |
| Torque | 175 Nm | 245 Nm |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
| Wheelbase Size | 2760 mm | 2750 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 132 L | 65 L |
