2004 Mazda 3 vs. 1996 Rover 400
To start off, 2004 Mazda 3 is newer by 8 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 1,595 cc (4 cylinders), 2004 Mazda 3 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1996 Rover 400 (109 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 5 more horse power than 2004 Mazda 3. (104 HP @ 4000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1996 Rover 400 should accelerate faster than 2004 Mazda 3.
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, 2004 Mazda 3 (230 Nm @ 1750 RPM) has 85 more torque (in Nm) than 1996 Rover 400. (145 Nm @ 3000 RPM). This means 2004 Mazda 3 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1996 Rover 400.
Compare all specifications:
2004 Mazda 3 | 1996 Rover 400 | |
Make | Mazda | Rover |
Model | 3 | 400 |
Year Released | 2004 | 1996 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1595 cc | 1589 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 104 HP | 109 HP |
Engine RPM | 4000 RPM | 6000 RPM |
Torque | 230 Nm | 145 Nm |
Torque RPM | 1750 RPM | 3000 RPM |
Engine Bore Size | 75 mm | 80 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 88.3 mm | 79 mm |
Engine Compression Ratio | 18.3:1 | 10.5:1 |
Fuel Type | Diesel | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Front | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Vehicle Length | 4500 mm | 4370 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1760 mm | 1690 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1470 mm | 1410 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2650 mm | 2560 mm |