Audi TT 2002 vs BMW 3 series 2003
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.8 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain and belt | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 143 HP | |
| Torque: | 210 NM | 200 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.9 seconds | 10 seconds | |
|
Audi TT is more dynamic to drive. Audi TT engine produces 7 HP more power than BMW 3 series, whereas torque is 10 NM more than BMW 3 series. Thanks to more power Audi TT reaches 100 km/h speed 1.1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.2 | 7.8 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.6 l/100km | 8.3 l/100km | |
|
By specification Audi TT consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the BMW 3 series, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Audi TT could require 60 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Audi TT consumes 0.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the BMW 3 series. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 56 litres | 63 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 680 km in combined cycle | 800 km in combined cycle | |
| 870 km on highway | 1030 km on highway | ||
| 650 km with real consumption | 750 km with real consumption | ||
| BMW 3 series 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 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. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 440'000 km | 380'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Audi TT engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 9 years | 6 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.04 m | 4.49 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.35 m | 1.37 m | |
| Audi TT is 45 cm shorter than the BMW 3 series, width is practically the same , while the height of Audi TT is 2 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 220 litres | 260 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 300 litres | |
|
BMW 3 series has more luggage space. Audi TT has 40 litres less trunk space than the BMW 3 series. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10 meters | 10 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`635 | 1`925 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | high | low | |
| Audi TT has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data BMW 3 series has serious deffects in 80 percent more cases than Audi TT, so Audi TT quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 4800 | 6000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Audi TT has
|
BMW 3 sērija has
| |