2004 Mazda 6 vs. 1996 Rover 400
To start off, 2004 Mazda 6 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 2,966 cc (6 cylinders), 2004 Mazda 6 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Mazda 6 (220 HP @ 4000 RPM) has 111 more horse power than 1996 Rover 400. (109 HP @ 6000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2004 Mazda 6 should accelerate faster than 1996 Rover 400.
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 6 (260 Nm) has 115 more torque (in Nm) than 1996 Rover 400. (145 Nm). This means 2004 Mazda 6 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1996 Rover 400.
Compare all specifications:
2004 Mazda 6 | 1996 Rover 400 | |
Make | Mazda | Rover |
Model | 6 | 400 |
Year Released | 2004 | 1996 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2966 cc | 1589 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 220 HP | 109 HP |
Engine RPM | 4000 RPM | 6000 RPM |
Torque | 260 Nm | 145 Nm |
Engine Bore Size | 89 mm | 80 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 80 mm | 79 mm |
Engine Compression Ratio | 10.0:1 | 10.5:1 |
Drive Type | Front | Front |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Vehicle Length | 4750 mm | 4370 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1790 mm | 1690 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1410 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2680 mm | 2560 mm |