Audi TT 2014 vs BMW Z4 2013
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 230 HP | 156 HP | |
| Torque: | 370 NM | 270 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 6.1 seconds | 8.1 seconds | |
|
Audi TT is more dynamic to drive. Audi TT engine produces 74 HP more power than BMW Z4, whereas torque is 100 NM more than BMW Z4. Thanks to more power Audi TT reaches 100 km/h speed 2 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.5 | 6.8 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.2 l/100km | 8.1 l/100km | |
|
The BMW Z4 is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Audi TT consumes 0.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the BMW Z4, which means that by driving the Audi TT over 15,000 km in a year you can save 45 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Audi TT consumes 1.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the BMW Z4. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 50 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 760 km in combined cycle | 800 km in combined cycle | |
| 920 km on highway | 1030 km on highway | ||
| 540 km with real consumption | 670 km with real consumption | ||
| BMW Z4 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 Z4) 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. | |||
| BMW Z4 2013 2.0 engine: Until 2015, engines used to have problems with the timing chain guides, which have been resolved over time. Other problems with this engine are the oil pump performance and its drive chain, as well as cracking ... More about BMW Z4 2013 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.18 m | 4.24 m | |
| Width: | 1.83 m | 1.79 m | |
| Height: | 1.35 m | 1.29 m | |
| Audi TT is 6 cm shorter than the BMW Z4, 4 cm wider, while the height of Audi TT is 6 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 280 litres | 180 litres | |
|
Audi TT has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, Audi TT has 100 litres more trunk space than the BMW Z4. The BMW Z4 may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.96 meters | 10.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Audi TT is 0.26 metres more than that of the BMW Z4. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`670 | 1`750 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Audi TT scores higher in safety tests, but BMW Z4 is better rated in child safety tests. The Audi TT scores significantly higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | high | high | |
| Audi TT has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for BMW Z4, so Audi TT quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | no data | 23 000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Audi TT has
|
BMW Z4 has
| |