2004 Mazda 3 vs. 2005 Rover 75
To start off, 2005 Rover 75 is newer by 1 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Mazda 3. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Mazda 3 would be higher. At 1,998 cc (4 cylinders), 2004 Mazda 3 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2005 Rover 75 (148 HP @ 5500 RPM) has 4 more horse power than 2004 Mazda 3. (144 HP @ 4000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2005 Rover 75 should accelerate faster than 2004 Mazda 3. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2005 Rover 75 weights approximately 192 kg more than 2004 Mazda 3. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
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, 2005 Rover 75 (215 Nm) has 31 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 Mazda 3. (184 Nm). This means 2005 Rover 75 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 Mazda 3.
Compare all specifications:
2004 Mazda 3 | 2005 Rover 75 | |
Make | Mazda | Rover |
Model | 3 | 75 |
Year Released | 2004 | 2005 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1998 cc | 1796 cc |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 144 HP | 148 HP |
Engine RPM | 4000 RPM | 5500 RPM |
Torque | 184 Nm | 215 Nm |
Drive Type | Front | Front |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1223 kg | 1415 kg |
Wheelbase Size | 2760 mm | 2750 mm |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 7.8 L/100km | 11.3 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 55 L | 65 L |