2005 Rover 25 vs. 2010 Holden Epica
To start off, 2010 Holden Epica is newer by 5 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2005 Rover 25. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2005 Rover 25 would be higher. At 2,492 cc (6 cylinders), 2010 Holden Epica is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2010 Holden Epica (153 HP) has 51 more horse power than 2005 Rover 25. (102 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Holden Epica should accelerate faster than 2005 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, 2010 Holden Epica (237 Nm) has 114 more torque (in Nm) than 2005 Rover 25. (123 Nm). This means 2010 Holden Epica will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2005 Rover 25.
Compare all specifications:
2005 Rover 25 | 2010 Holden Epica | |
Make | Rover | Holden |
Model | 25 | Epica |
Year Released | 2005 | 2010 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1396 cc | 2492 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 102 HP | 153 HP |
Torque | 123 Nm | 237 Nm |
Fuel Type | Gasoline - Premium | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Front | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 3 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4000 mm | 4805 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1690 mm | 1810 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1420 mm | 1450 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2510 mm | 2700 mm |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 6.6 L/100km | 9.3 L/100km |