Ford Sierra 1990 vs BMW 3 series 1991
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 105 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 166 NM | 190 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.8 seconds | 9.9 seconds | |
|
BMW 3 series is a more dynamic driving. Ford Sierra engine produces 45 HP less power than BMW 3 series, whereas torque is 24 NM less than BMW 3 series. Due to the lower power, Ford Sierra reaches 100 km/h speed 0.9 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.5 | 9.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.4 l/100km | 9.3 l/100km | |
|
By specification Ford Sierra consumes 1.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the BMW 3 series, which means that by driving the Ford Sierra over 15,000 km in a year you can save 225 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Ford Sierra consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the BMW 3 series. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 65 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 800 km in combined cycle | 720 km in combined cycle | |
| 630 km with real consumption | 690 km with real consumption | ||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.47 m | 4.43 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.41 m | 1.39 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Ford Sierra is 4 cm longer than the BMW 3 series, width is practically the same , while the height of Ford Sierra is 2 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 435 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1200 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10 meters | 10 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`350 | 1`760 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | below average | |
| BMW 3 series has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Ford Sierra, so BMW 3 series quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 1800 | 2200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Sierra has
|
BMW 3 sērija has
| |