Audi TT 2007 vs BMW 3 series 2007
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 200 HP | 156 HP | |
| Torque: | 280 NM | 200 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 6.7 seconds | 10.1 seconds | |
|
Audi TT is more dynamic to drive. Audi TT engine produces 44 HP more power than BMW 3 series, whereas torque is 80 NM more than BMW 3 series. Thanks to more power Audi TT reaches 100 km/h speed 3.4 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.8 | 8.2 | |
|
The Audi TT is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Audi TT consumes 0.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the BMW 3 series, which means that by driving the Audi TT over 15,000 km in a year you can save 60 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 63 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 700 km in combined cycle | 760 km in combined cycle | |
| 880 km on highway | 1010 km on highway | ||
| BMW 3 series gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Audi TT) have better traction on slippery roads and when climbing hills, better fuel economy, and are less expensive to purchase. On the disadvantage side, FWD cars usually have less towing capacity, poorer acceleration and harder handling. Rear-wheel drive cars (BMW 3 series) have better handling on dry roads, better acceleration, more even weight distribution and more fun to drive. RWD is also better for towing large loads. The cons of rear-wheel drive are less interior and trunk space and more difficulty maneuvering in wet and snowy conditions. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 350'000 km | 350'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 10 years | 6 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Audi A3, Volkswagen Passat CC, Volkswagen Beetle | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including BMW 5 sērija, BMW 1 sērija | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Audi TT might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.18 m | 4.58 m | |
| Width: | 1.84 m | 1.78 m | |
| Height: | 1.36 m | 1.38 m | |
| Audi TT is 40 cm shorter than the BMW 3 series, 6 cm wider, while the height of Audi TT is 2 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 250 litres | 210 litres | |
|
Audi TT has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, Audi TT has 40 litres more trunk space than the BMW 3 series. The BMW 3 series may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 11 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`615 | 2`025 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | high | average | |
| Audi TT has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data BMW 3 series has serious deffects in 90 percent more cases than Audi TT, so Audi TT quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 5200 | 9800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Audi TT has
|
BMW 3 sērija has
| |