2009 Chevrolet Impala vs. 2013 Mini Roadster
To start off, 2013 Mini Roadster is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2009 Chevrolet Impala. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2009 Chevrolet Impala would be higher.
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, 2009 Chevrolet Impala (325 Nm @ 4000 RPM) has 65 more torque (in Nm) than 2013 Mini Roadster. (260 Nm @ 4500 RPM). This means 2009 Chevrolet Impala will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2013 Mini Roadster. 2009 Chevrolet Impala has automatic transmission and 2013 Mini Roadster has manual transmission. 2013 Mini Roadster will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2009 Chevrolet Impala will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 2009 Chevrolet Impala | 2013 Mini Roadster | |
| Make | Chevrolet | Mini |
| Model | Impala | Roadster |
| Year Released | 2009 | 2013 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Roadster |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 234 HP | 0 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5600 RPM | 5500 RPM |
| Torque | 325 Nm | 260 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4000 RPM | 4500 RPM |
| Drive Type | Front | Front |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | 6-speed manual |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 5100 mm | 3734 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1860 mm | 1892 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1500 mm | 1390 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2810 mm | 2467 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 8.7 L/100km | 5.6 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 13.8 L/100km | 7.6 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 64 L | 50 L |
