2002 Ford Ka vs. 2003 Rover 75
To start off, 2003 Rover 75 is newer by 1 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2002 Ford Ka. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2002 Ford Ka would be higher. At 1,769 cc (4 cylinders), 2003 Rover 75 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2002 Ford Ka (135 HP @ 5500 RPM) has 20 more horse power than 2003 Rover 75. (115 HP @ 5500 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2002 Ford Ka should accelerate faster than 2003 Rover 75. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2003 Rover 75 weights approximately 339 kg more than 2002 Ford Ka.
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, 2002 Ford Ka (175 Nm @ 4250 RPM) has 15 more torque (in Nm) than 2003 Rover 75. (160 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 2002 Ford Ka will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2003 Rover 75.
Compare all specifications:
| 2002 Ford Ka | 2003 Rover 75 | |
| Make | Ford | Rover |
| Model | Ka | 75 |
| Year Released | 2002 | 2003 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1596 cc | 1769 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 135 HP | 115 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5500 RPM | 5500 RPM |
| Torque | 175 Nm | 160 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4250 RPM | 4000 RPM |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 9.5:1 | 10.5:1 |
| Drive Type | Front | Front |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 1136 kg | 1475 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 3660 mm | 4800 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1700 mm | 1780 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1340 mm | 1430 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2450 mm | 2830 mm |
