2006 Chevrolet TrailBlazer vs. 2008 Rover 75
To start off, 2008 Rover 75 is newer by 2 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2006 Chevrolet TrailBlazer. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2006 Chevrolet TrailBlazer would be higher. At 5,964 cc (6 cylinders), 2006 Chevrolet TrailBlazer is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2008 Rover 75 weights approximately 457 kg more than 2006 Chevrolet TrailBlazer.
Because 2006 Chevrolet TrailBlazer is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2008 Rover 75. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2006 Chevrolet TrailBlazer will offer significantly more control. 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, 2006 Chevrolet TrailBlazer (542 Nm @ 4400 RPM) has 302 more torque (in Nm) than 2008 Rover 75. (240 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 2006 Chevrolet TrailBlazer will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2008 Rover 75.
Compare all specifications:
| 2006 Chevrolet TrailBlazer | 2008 Rover 75 | |
| Make | Chevrolet | Rover |
| Model | TrailBlazer | 75 |
| Year Released | 2006 | 2008 |
| Engine Size | 5964 cc | 2497 cc |
| Horse Power | 395 HP | 0 HP |
| Torque | 542 Nm | 240 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4400 RPM | 4000 RPM |
| Drive Type | 4WD | Front |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1078 kg | 1535 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4880 mm | 4000 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1850 mm | 1420 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2880 mm | 2750 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 13.8 L/100km | 9.9 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 83 L | 65 L |
