Chevrolet Camaro 1998 vs BMW 3 series 2000
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.8 Petrol | 3.0 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 193 HP | 231 HP | |
| Torque: | 305 NM | 300 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.5 seconds | 6.9 seconds | |
|
BMW 3 series is a more dynamic driving. Chevrolet Camaro engine produces 38 HP less power than BMW 3 series, but torque is 5 NM more than BMW 3 series. Due to the lower power, Chevrolet Camaro reaches 100 km/h speed 1.6 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 12.4 | 9.6 | |
|
The BMW 3 series is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Chevrolet Camaro consumes 2.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the BMW 3 series, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Chevrolet Camaro could require 420 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 59 litres | 63 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 470 km in combined cycle | 650 km in combined cycle | |
| 610 km on highway | 860 km on highway | ||
| BMW 3 series gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.91 m | 4.49 m | |
| Width: | 1.88 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.30 m | 1.37 m | |
|
Chevrolet Camaro is larger, but lower. Chevrolet Camaro is 42 cm longer than the BMW 3 series, 12 cm wider, while the height of Chevrolet Camaro is 7 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 300 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 300 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.6 meters | 10 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Chevrolet Camaro is 1.6 metres more than that of the BMW 3 series, which means Chevrolet Camaro can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 2`005 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | below average | |
| Average price (€): | 3000 | 5000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Chevrolet Camaro has
|
BMW 3 sērija has
| |