Rover P4

Rover P4 specs: which version to buy

The Rover P4 was built as 1 generation from 1949-01-01 to 1964-12-31, body type Sedan, with 9 versions. Every version is Gasoline, Front, longitudinal, No boost, Carburetor feed, 2 valves per cylinder, RWD, and a front Independent, spring setup with Drum front brakes.

The Rover P4 was built as 1 generation from 1949-01-01 to 1964-12-31, body type Sedan, with 9 versions. Every version is Gasoline, Front, longitudinal, No boost, Carburetor feed, 2 valves per cylinder, RWD, and a front Independent, spring setup with Drum front brakes. Rear suspension, rear brakes, kerb weight, gross weight, ground clearance, tank, wheels, fuel use, CO2, and eco class are not measured on every version, so this comparison cannot use weight-per-horsepower or mpg. What is measured is a 60–123 hp spread on 1997–2600 cm³, 4-speed Manual on eight versions versus one 2-speed Automatic, and 0–100 km/h from 26.5 s down to 17.6 s where those times exist.

Generations: what changed inside the only P4 generation

1 generation (1949-01-01–1964-12-31), Sedan, 9 versions. There is no second generation to “wait for.” The choice is inside this generation: two Inline 4 cars (2.0 MT 60 hp, 2.3 MT 80 hp) and seven Inline 6 cars, six of them named 2.6 MT and one 2.6 AT. Restyling is not listed as a separate generation in the data, so it is not treated as one here.

Arithmetic that is allowed from the table: the strongest 2.6 MT (123 hp) has 63 hp more than 2.0 MT (60 hp) — 2.05× the power — on 603 cm³ more displacement. The weakest six-cylinder, 2.1 MT (75 hp), already has 15 hp more than 2.0 MT on only 106 cm³ more. The four-cylinder 2.3 MT (80 hp, 2300 cm³) sits 5 hp above 2.1 MT but is 0.8 s slower to 100 km/h (22.4 s vs 21.6 s) and only 3 km/h faster at the top (137 vs 134 km/h). That is the first buying fork: extra cylinders beat extra four-cylinder displacement on the measured sprint.

Engine specs: all 9 versions named as in the database

Power per litre below is hp ÷ (displacement in cm³ / 1000). Torque (Nm) is not measured on every row.

Specific output:

• 2.0 MT: 60 / 1.997 ≈ 30.0 hp/L
• 2.1 MT: 75 / 2.103 ≈ 35.7 hp/L
• 2.3 MT: 80 / 2.300 ≈ 34.8 hp/L
• 2.6 MT 90 hp: 90 / 2.600 ≈ 34.6 hp/L
• 2.6 MT 100 hp: 100 / 2.600 ≈ 38.5 hp/L
• 2.6 MT 102 hp: 102 / 2.600 ≈ 39.2 hp/L
• 2.6 MT 108 hp and 2.6 AT 108 hp: 108 / 2.600 ≈ 41.5 hp/L
• 2.6 MT 123 hp: 123 / 2.600 ≈ 47.3 hp/L

The 123 hp 2.6 MT makes 17.3 hp/L more than 2.0 MT and 12.7 hp/L more than the 90 hp 2.6 MT. Compression ratio is measured on three of the 2600 cm³ sixes: 6.73 (90 hp 2.6 MT), 8.5 (both 108 hp cars), 8.8 (123 hp 2.6 MT). From 6.73 to 8.8 is +2.07 ratio points and +33 hp on the same 2600 cm³. Bore × stroke is measured only on the 90 hp 2.6 MT: 73 × 105.

Performance and economy (0–100, top speed, mpg)

0–100 km/h is measured on five versions; not measured on 2.6 MT 102 hp, 2.6 MT 108 hp, 2.6 AT 108 hp, and 2.6 MT 123 hp.

Gaps that matter for buying:

• 2.6 MT 100 hp vs 2.0 MT: 8.9 s quicker to 100 km/h, +26 km/h top speed, +40 hp.
• 2.6 MT 90 hp vs 2.0 MT: 7.6 s quicker, +23 km/h.
• 2.1 MT vs 2.0 MT: 4.9 s quicker, +12 km/h, +15 hp.
• 2.3 MT vs 2.1 MT: 5 hp more and +3 km/h, but 0.8 s slower to 100 km/h.
• 2.6 MT 100 hp vs 2.6 MT 90 hp: +10 hp, 1.3 s quicker, +3 km/h.
• 2.6 MT 108 hp / 2.6 AT vs 2.6 MT 100 hp: +8 hp, +3 km/h (151 vs 148); 0–100 not measured on the 108 hp pair, so you cannot claim they are quicker.
• 2.6 AT vs 2.6 MT 108 hp: same 108 hp, same 151 km/h, same 8.5 compression; the only measured difference is Automatic, 2 gears vs Manual, 4. 0–100 is not measured on both, so the automatic is not proven slower here.

Fuel consumption, CO2, and eco class are not measured on all nine. Do not infer mpg from displacement.

Dimensions and weight

Kerb weight, gross weight, ground clearance, tank, and wheel sizes are not measured for every P4 version in this dataset. Weight per horsepower cannot be calculated. Chassis items that are the same on every listed version: front Independent, spring; front Drum; RWD; Front, longitudinal engine. Rear suspension and rear brakes are not measured.

Which version to choose

If you want the smallest engine and will accept the slowest measured car: 2.0 MT — 60 hp, 1997 cm³, Inline 4, 26.5 s, 122 km/h, 30.0 hp/L. It is 63 hp and 29 km/h behind the fastest measured top speed in the range (151 km/h on the 108 hp pair).

If you want six cylinders without stepping to 2600 cm³: 2.1 MT — 75 hp, 2103 cm³, 21.6 s, 134 km/h. Versus 2.3 MT (80 hp, 2300 cm³, Inline 4, 22.4 s, 137 km/h) you give up 5 hp and 3 km/h and gain 0.8 s on 0–100 and 0.9 hp/L (35.7 vs 34.8). The data does not support buying 2.3 MT for acceleration.

If you want the first 2600 cm³ six with a full performance pair: 2.6 MT (90 hp) — 18.9 s, 145 km/h, compression 6.73, bore × stroke 73 × 105. Versus 2.1 MT that is +15 hp, 2.7 s quicker, +11 km/h.

If you want the strongest fully measured sprint in the catalogue: 2.6 MT (100 hp) — 17.6 s, 148 km/h, 38.5 hp/L. That is the best 0–100 we actually have. The 102 / 108 / 123 hp cars do not beat it on paper because their 0–100 is not measured.

If you want the highest measured top speed and will take either gearbox: 2.6 MT (108 hp) or 2.6 AT (108 hp) — both 108 hp / 80 kW, 151 km/h, compression 8.5, 41.5 hp/L. 2.6 AT is the only Automatic and the only 2-speed. Same speed rating as the 108 hp manual; no 0–100 on either. Choose 2.6 AT only for the gearbox, not for a speed claim.

If you want maximum listed power and specific output: 2.6 MT (123 hp) — 123 hp / 91 kW, 8.8 compression, 47.3 hp/L. Versus the 90 hp 2.6 MT that is +33 hp and +2.07 compression on the same 2600 cm³. Versus the 100 hp 2.6 MT it is +23 hp, but 0–100 and top speed are not measured, so you cannot prove it is the fastest car — only the most powerful listed.

2.6 MT (102 hp) sits +2 hp over the 100 hp 2.6 MT and −6 hp under the 108 hp pair, with no 0–100 and no top speed. On this dataset it is the weakest buying case among the six 2600 cm³ manuals: you cannot show what the extra 2 hp over 100 hp buys.

What “extra” does not buy here: there is no second generation, no AWD, no boost, no measured fuel saving, no measured weight reduction. Drive, layout, fuel type, and front chassis labels do not change between versions. The real splits are Inline 4 vs Inline 6, 1997 / 2103 / 2300 / 2600 cm³, 60–123 hp, Manual 4 vs Automatic 2, and whether 0–100 and top speed were measured.

Problems / reliability: this dataset has no failure rates, no service intervals, and no known-fault list. Those searches cannot be answered from the numbers above.

Short buy map (facts only): slowest measured — 2.0 MT; six-cylinder that beats the larger four on 0–100 — 2.1 MT; first 2.6 with compression and bore×stroke — 2.6 MT 90 hp; best measured 0–100 — 2.6 MT 100 hp; highest measured top speed — 2.6 MT 108 hp or 2.6 AT 108 hp; only automatic — 2.6 AT; most horsepower — 2.6 MT 123 hp; avoid claiming economy, weight, or clearance for any of them — those figures are not measured.