Audi TT 2003 vs BMW 1 series 2004
| Body: | Coupe | Hatchback | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 1.8 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain and belt | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 116 HP | |
| Torque: | 210 NM | 150 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.6 seconds | 11 seconds | |
|
Audi TT is more dynamic to drive. Audi TT engine produces 34 HP more power than BMW 1 series, whereas torque is 60 NM more than BMW 1 series. Thanks to more power Audi TT reaches 100 km/h speed 2.4 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.1 | 7.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.4 l/100km | 8.6 l/100km | |
|
By specification Audi TT consumes 0.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the BMW 1 series, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Audi TT could require 90 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Audi TT consumes 0.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the BMW 1 series. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 50 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 670 km in combined cycle | 660 km in combined cycle | |
| 870 km on highway | 840 km on highway | ||
| 650 km with real consumption | 580 km with real consumption | ||
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 1 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: | 440'000 km | 420'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 9 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 9 other car models, including Volkswagen Passat, Volkswagen Golf, Audi A4, Skoda Octavia, Audi A3 | Used only for this car | |
| 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. | |||
| Audi TT 2003 1.8 engine: The weakest link in this engine is the turbine, whose failure is contributed to by a faulty catalytic converter. The oil pump and chain tensioner also tend to have problems. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.04 m | 4.23 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.75 m | |
| Height: | 1.35 m | 1.43 m | |
| Audi TT is 19 cm shorter than the BMW 1 series, 1 cm wider, while the height of Audi TT is 8 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 270 litres | 330 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1150 litres | |
|
BMW 1 series has more luggage space. Audi TT has 60 litres less trunk space than the BMW 1 series. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Audi TT is 1 metres less than that of the BMW 1 series, which means Audi TT can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`665 | 1`705 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | high | average | |
| Audi TT has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data BMW 1 series has serious deffects in 50 percent more cases than Audi TT, so Audi TT quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 4800 | 3000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Audi TT has
|
BMW 1 sērija has
| |