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 1,999 cc (4 cylinders), 2004 Mazda 6 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Mazda 6 (144 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 35 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 (181 Nm @ 4500 RPM) has 36 more torque (in Nm) than 1996 Rover 400. (145 Nm @ 3000 RPM). 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 | 1999 cc | 1589 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 144 HP | 109 HP |
Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 6000 RPM |
Torque | 181 Nm | 145 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4500 RPM | 3000 RPM |
Engine Bore Size | 87.5 mm | 80 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 83.1 mm | 79 mm |
Engine Compression Ratio | 11.0:1 | 10.5:1 |
Fuel Type | Gasoline - Premium | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Front | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Vehicle Length | 4710 mm | 4370 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1790 mm | 1690 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1490 mm | 1410 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2610 mm | 2560 mm |