2006 Rover 75 vs. 2010 Mazda BT-50
To start off, 2010 Mazda BT-50 is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2006 Rover 75. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2006 Rover 75 would be higher. At 2,953 cc (4 cylinders), 2010 Mazda BT-50 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Rover 75 (158 HP) has 4 more horse power than 2010 Mazda BT-50. (154 HP). In normal driving conditions, 2006 Rover 75 should accelerate faster than 2010 Mazda BT-50.
Because 2010 Mazda BT-50 is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2006 Rover 75. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2010 Mazda BT-50 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, 2010 Mazda BT-50 (380 Nm @ 180 RPM) has 165 more torque (in Nm) than 2006 Rover 75. (215 Nm @ 2100 RPM). This means 2010 Mazda BT-50 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2006 Rover 75.
Compare all specifications:
| 2006 Rover 75 | 2010 Mazda BT-50 | |
| Make | Rover | Mazda |
| Model | 75 | BT-50 |
| Year Released | 2006 | 2010 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1796 cc | 2953 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 158 HP | 154 HP |
| Torque | 215 Nm | 380 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2100 RPM | 180 RPM |
| Engine Bore Size | 80 mm | 96.1 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 89.3 mm | 102 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 10.5:1 | 18.0:1 |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline - Premium | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Front | 4WD |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 2 seats |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Height | 1440 mm | 1810 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2750 mm | 3010 mm |
