2002 Mitsubishi eK vs. 2004 Rover 75
To start off, 2004 Rover 75 is newer by 2 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2002 Mitsubishi eK. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2002 Mitsubishi eK would be higher. At 4,601 cc (8 cylinders), 2004 Rover 75 is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2004 Rover 75 weights approximately 890 kg more than 2002 Mitsubishi eK.
Because 2004 Rover 75 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 2004 Rover 75. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2002 Mitsubishi eK, 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.
Compare all specifications:
| 2002 Mitsubishi eK | 2004 Rover 75 | |
| Make | Mitsubishi | Rover |
| Model | eK | 75 |
| Year Released | 2002 | 2004 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 657 cc | 4601 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 3 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 256 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 790 kg | 1680 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 3400 mm | 4760 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1480 mm | 1780 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1560 mm | 1430 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2350 mm | 2780 mm |
