BMW 3 series 1995 vs Audi A3 1996
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.7 Diesel | 1.9 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 90 HP | 90 HP | |
| Torque: | 190 NM | 202 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 14 seconds | 12.4 seconds | |
|
Audi A3 is a more dynamic driving. BMW 3 series and Audi A3 have the same engine power, but BMW 3 series torque is 12 NM less than Audi A3. BMW 3 series reaches 100 km/h speed 1.6 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.4 | 4.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.6 l/100km | 5.4 l/100km | |
|
The Audi A3 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification BMW 3 series consumes 1.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Audi A3, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the BMW 3 series could require 225 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, BMW 3 series consumes 1.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Audi A3. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 52 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 810 km in combined cycle | 1120 km in combined cycle | |
| 1040 km on highway | 1340 km on highway | ||
| 780 km with real consumption | 1010 km with real consumption | ||
| Audi A3 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Audi A3) 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.21 m | 4.15 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.74 m | |
| Height: | 1.39 m | 1.42 m | |
| BMW 3 series is 6 cm longer than the Audi A3, 4 cm narrower, while the height of BMW 3 series is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 325 litres | 350 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1030 litres | 1100 litres | |
|
Audi A3 has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, BMW 3 series has 25 litres less trunk space than the Audi A3. This could mean that the BMW 3 series uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Audi A3 (by 70 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10 meters | 10.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the BMW 3 series is 0.9 metres less than that of the Audi A3, which means BMW 3 series can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`675 | 1`680 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | average | |
| Audi A3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data BMW 3 series has serious deffects in 25 percent more cases than Audi A3, so Audi A3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 2000 | 1000 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.3/10 | 8.0/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
BMW 3 sērija has
|
Audi A3 has
| |