2009 Chevrolet Cobalt vs. 2006 Rover 75
To start off, 2009 Chevrolet Cobalt is newer by 3 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 4,601 cc (8 cylinders), 2006 Rover 75 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Rover 75 (256 HP) has 101 more horse power than 2009 Chevrolet Cobalt. (155 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2006 Rover 75 should accelerate faster than 2009 Chevrolet Cobalt.
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, 2006 Rover 75 (245 Nm @ 4000 RPM) has 42 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Chevrolet Cobalt. (203 Nm @ 4900 RPM). This means 2006 Rover 75 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Chevrolet Cobalt.
Compare all specifications:
2009 Chevrolet Cobalt | 2006 Rover 75 | |
Make | Chevrolet | Rover |
Model | Cobalt | 75 |
Year Released | 2009 | 2006 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2201 cc | 4601 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
Horse Power | 155 HP | 256 HP |
Torque | 203 Nm | 245 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4900 RPM | 4000 RPM |
Engine Compression Ratio | 9.1:1 | 9.4:1 |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline - Premium |
Drive Type | Front | Front |
Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4590 mm | 4750 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1730 mm | 1780 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1420 mm | 1430 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2630 mm | 2750 mm |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 8.7 L/100km | 13.6 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 49 L | 65 L |