Last Update: Mar. 23, 2019, 5:35 a.m.
Home >>> >>> Chevrolet Kalos and Rover 25

What is Better Chevrolet Kalos or Rover 25?

Exterior

Chevrolet Kalos Rover 25

8 reasons to buy Chevrolet Kalos

Fuel consumption
Less fuel consumption (Combined cycle) 44.11 mpg vs 53.76 mpg 22% or 9.65 mpg
Less fuel consumption (Highway) 54.25 mpg vs 68.21 mpg 26% or 13.96 mpg
Less fuel consumption (City) 33.19 mpg vs 39.2 mpg 18% or 6.01 mpg
Emissions
Higher european emission standard EURO 4 vs EURO 3 1 generation
Weight and capacity
More maximum towing weight with brakes 1100 kg vs 1000 kg 9% or 100 kg
More maximum roof load 100 kg vs 65 kg 35% or 35 kg
Other specs
Less weight 990 kg vs 1130 kg 14% or 140 kg Weight of the vehicle affects: fuel consumption, acceleration dynamic, braking distance, etc.
Less turning radius 10.06 meters vs 10.42 meters 4% or 0.36 meters

12 reasons to buy Rover 25

Engine and transmission
Better compression 19.5 vs 9.3 52% or 10.2 . The greater degree of compression = the less fuel need to produce the same power.
Piston diameter larger 84.5 mm vs 68.5 mm 19% or 16 mm larger. The larger diameter of cylinder = the greater filling ratio. Cons: increase emissions of toxic substances.
Piston stroke longer 88.9 mm vs 78 mm 12% or 10.9 mm. The longer stroke = lower fuel consumption and fewer emissions.
More engine power

100 bhp vs 72 bhp

74 kw. vs 53 kw.

28% or 28 bhp. More power of car = more top speed.
More torque 240 nM vs 104 nM 57% or 136 nM. More torque = faster acceleration.
Performance
Faster acceleration from 0 to 60 mph 9.9 sec. vs 13.7 sec. 3.8 sec.
More top speed 113 mph vs 98 mph 15 mph
Emissions
Less CO2 emissions 93 g/mile vs 95 g/mile 2% or 2 g/mile
Weight and capacity
More minimum boot capacity 304 liters vs 220 liters 28% or 84 liters
More capacity of fuel tank 50 liters vs 45 liters 10% or 5 liters
More maximum allowable weight 1600 kg vs 1455 kg 9% or 145 kg
More maximum bearing capacity 470 kg vs 465 kg 1% or 5 kg

Neutral reasons Chevrolet Kalos vs. Rover 25

Engine and transmission
Engine speed (RPM) 5400 RPM vs 4200 RPM 22% or 1200 more rpms.
Engine capacity 1150 cm3 vs 1994 cm3 42% or 844 cm3 less
Engine position Front transverse vs Front transverse
Cylinders location In line vs In line
Camshaft SOHC vs SOHC
Fuel supply Distributor fuel injection vs Direct fuel injection with turbocharging
Turbocharging Yes vs Yes
Dimensions
Length 3880 mm vs 3999 mm 3% or 119 mm shorter
Width 1670 mm vs 1688 mm 1% or 18 mm narrower
Height 1495 mm vs 1395 mm 7% or 100 mm higher
Wheels and tires
Wheelbase 2480 mm vs 2500 mm 1% or 20 mm less
Front tires size 185/60 R14 vs 185/55 R15
Rear tires size 185/60 R14 vs 185/55 R15
Type of wheels 14" steel vs 15" alloy wheels
*Specs may vary depending on configurations and year of production(taken parameters of last released versions)