Compare two cars
Compare any two cars and get our Virtual Adviser™ opinion
Marketing
Dimensons & Outlines
Engine
1.8 K-Series 18K4F THP
Performance (manual gearbox)
Performance (automatic gearbox)
Expenses
Virtual Adviser's™ opinion
Well, these are two pretty similar cars we have here! It's only details that could potentially make the difference. Considering they both belong to the luxury car segment and utilize the same 5-door wagon body style and the front wheel drive system, it all comes up to the specific petrol engine choice they offer. Both the engines are Rover-engineered . The first one has a 6-cylinder, 24-valves 150hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 160hp one.
SafetyEventhough they might appear to be different models, both cars are actually structurally the same, so none of the two gets an advantage over the other when it comes to safety.
ReliabilityManufacturers have been building their reliability reputation for decades now and, generally speaking, it appears that Rover as a brand displays somewhat better results, when all the models are taken into account. That's the official data, while our visitors describe reliability of Rover with an average rating of 4.5, and models under the MG badge with out of 5. Unfortunatelly, I don't have enough insight that would allow me to comment in more details on the specific models level. Above it all, drivers of cars with the same engine as Rover 75 rank it on average as 5.0, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 3.0 out of 5.
Performance & Fuel economyRover is undoubtly more agile, reaching 100km/h in 2.2 seconds less than its competitor. Still, it lacks the power to win the top speed competition, topping at 203 kilometers per hour, 7km/h less than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy things look pretty much the same for both cars, averaging around 7.9 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (36 mpg), in combined cycle.
Verdict
Rover definitely wins the reliability competition, everything taken into consideration. The most important thing when deciding between any two vehicles should always be safety, both passive and active. In this case though, it seems that both cars show similar levels of passenger protection all together, so that won't break a tie. But one thing that actually could is the performance, with Rover being considerably quicker, thus putting more smile on driver's face. It does come at a cost though, and that's the fuel consumption... I believe that, when we take all into account, we have only one winner here - the Rover. Anyway, that's the most objective conclusion I could've came up with and it's based solely on the information found on this website. Aspects such as design, practicality, brand value and driving experience are there for you to measure them out. I suggest you spend two more minutes in order to find out which car, based on your needs and budget, would be picked by the virtual adviser™, among thousands of similar, yet so different vehicles.