DETAILED CAR COMPARISON

1996 Rover Mini MK vs 1996 Ford KA Comparison

Compare technical specifications, scores and everyday-use differences side by side.

VS
WINNER

Rover Mini MK

Leads the overall E-Kıyasla score by 0.25 points.

42.5–42.25
SPECIFICATION GROUPS

Every difference between the two cars

Basic Specifications

RoverMakeFord
Mini MKModelKA
1996Model year1996
HatchbackBody typeHatchback
5Seats5
3Doors3

Performance

13,4 s0–100 km/h15,4 s
140 km/hTop speed155 km/h
1274 ccEngine displacement1299 cc
50 HPPower60 HP
89 NmTorque105 Nm
4Cylinders4

Fuel & Consumption

PetrolFuel typePetrol
34 ltFuel tank42 lt
7,6 ltUrban consumption8,6 lt
5,2 ltExtra-urban consumption5,5 lt
8,4 ltAverage consumption—

Transmission & Chassis

Front-wheel driveDrivetrainFront-wheel drive
4Gears5
145/70 R12Tyre size155/70 R13
YesABS—

Dimensions

3050 mmLength3620 mm
1410 mmWidth1639 mm
1350 mmHeight1383 mm
645 KgWeight890 Kg
2035 mmWheelbase2448 mm

E-Kıyasla Editor’s Note

1996 Rover Mini MK and 1996 Ford KA approach the same decision from different angles. We compare the exact versions so changes in engine, transmission, dimensions and equipment are not hidden behind the model names.

Overall, Rover Mini MK leads the E-Kıyasla score by 0.25 points. The score provides a consistent summary, while the best choice can still change with priorities such as urban efficiency, luggage space, performance or equipment.

SIMILAR COMPARISONS

Similar comparisons

Explore related comparisons featuring cars from this matchup.

Comments are loading…