2002 Rover 25 vs. 2008 Volkswagen Polo
To start off, 2008 Volkswagen Polo is newer by 6 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2002 Rover 25. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2002 Rover 25 would be higher. At 1,396 cc (4 cylinders), 2002 Rover 25 is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2008 Volkswagen Polo weights approximately 36 kg more than 2002 Rover 25.
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, 2008 Volkswagen Polo (127 Nm @ 3800 RPM) has 17 more torque (in Nm) than 2002 Rover 25. (110 Nm @ 4500 RPM). This means 2008 Volkswagen Polo will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2002 Rover 25.
Compare all specifications:
2002 Rover 25 | 2008 Volkswagen Polo | |
Make | Rover | Volkswagen |
Model | 25 | Polo |
Year Released | 2002 | 2008 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1396 cc | 1390 cc |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 86 HP | 0 HP |
Torque | 110 Nm | 127 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4500 RPM | 3800 RPM |
Engine Bore Size | 75 mm | 75.6 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 79 mm | 76.5 mm |
Engine Compression Ratio | 10.5:1 | 10.5:1 |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Top Speed | 204 km/hour | 172 km/hour |
Drive Type | Front | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 3 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1020 kg | 1056 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4000 mm | 4220 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1700 mm | 1660 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1420 mm | 1460 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2510 mm | 2470 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 50 L | 45 L |