DETAILED CAR COMPARISON

2000 ZAZ 1103 vs 2000 Rover Mini MK 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.

43.25–43.5
SPECIFICATION GROUPS

Every difference between the two cars

Basic Specifications

ZAZMakeRover
1103ModelMini MK
2000Model year2000
HatchbackBody typeHatchback
5Seats5
5Doors3

Performance

17,0 s0–100 km/h13,4 s
153 km/hTop speed140 km/h
1254 ccEngine displacement1274 cc
60 HPPower50 HP
94 NmTorque89 Nm
4Cylinders4

Fuel & Consumption

PetrolFuel typePetrol
38 ltFuel tank34 lt
—Urban consumption7,6 lt
—Extra-urban consumption5,2 lt
—Average consumption8,4 lt

Transmission & Chassis

Front-wheel driveDrivetrainFront-wheel drive
5Gears4
155/70 R13Tyre size145/70 R12
YesABSYes

Dimensions

3980 mmLength3050 mm
1564 mmWidth1410 mm
1410 mmHeight1350 mm
790 KgWeight645 Kg
2320 mmWheelbase2035 mm

E-Kıyasla Editor’s Note

2000 ZAZ 1103 and 2000 Rover Mini MK 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…