2002 BMW M3 vs. 1996 Rover 400
To start off, 2002 BMW M3 is newer by 6 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1996 Rover 400. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1996 Rover 400 would be higher. At 3,997 cc (8 cylinders), 2002 BMW M3 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2002 BMW M3 (444 HP @ 7400 RPM) has 335 more horse power than 1996 Rover 400. (109 HP @ 6000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2002 BMW M3 should accelerate faster than 1996 Rover 400.
Because 2002 BMW M3 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 2002 BMW M3. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1996 Rover 400, 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, 2002 BMW M3 (480 Nm) has 335 more torque (in Nm) than 1996 Rover 400. (145 Nm). This means 2002 BMW M3 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1996 Rover 400.
Compare all specifications:
2002 BMW M3 | 1996 Rover 400 | |
Make | BMW | Rover |
Model | M3 | 400 |
Year Released | 2002 | 1996 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3997 cc | 1589 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 444 HP | 109 HP |
Engine RPM | 7400 RPM | 6000 RPM |
Torque | 480 Nm | 145 Nm |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Wheelbase Size | 2890 mm | 2560 mm |