BMW 3 series 1991 vs Audi A3 2000
| Body: | Sedan | Hatchback | |
|---|---|---|---|
| The hatchback generally has more luggage space thanks to a larger trunk door opening and the ability to convert the rear of the passenger compartment into luggage space. Sedans tend to be quieter than hatchbacks, due to a more isolated rear area. | |||
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 1.8 Petrol | 1.8 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 140 HP | 125 HP | |
| Torque: | 175 NM | 170 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.2 seconds | 9.7 seconds | |
| BMW 3 series engine produces 15 HP more power than Audi A3, whereas torque is 5 NM more than Audi A3. Despite the higher power, BMW 3 series reaches 100 km/h speed 0.5 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.9 | 7.8 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.6 l/100km | 8.1 l/100km | |
|
By specification BMW 3 series consumes 0.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Audi A3, which means that by driving the BMW 3 series over 15,000 km in a year you can save 135 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, BMW 3 series consumes 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Audi A3. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 65 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 940 km in combined cycle | 700 km in combined cycle | |
| 1010 km on highway | 880 km on highway | ||
| 750 km with real consumption | 670 km with real consumption | ||
| BMW 3 series gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Audi A3) 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.43 m | 4.15 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.74 m | |
| Height: | 1.39 m | 1.43 m | |
| BMW 3 series is 28 cm longer than the Audi A3, 4 cm narrower, while the height of BMW 3 series is 4 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 435 litres | 350 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1110 litres | |
|
BMW 3 series has more luggage capacity. BMW 3 series has 85 litres more trunk space than the Audi A3. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10 meters | 10.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the BMW 3 series is 0.9 metres less than that of the Audi A3, which means BMW 3 series can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`700 | 1`720 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | low | above average | |
| Audi A3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data BMW 3 series has serious deffects in 310 percent more cases than Audi A3, so Audi A3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 2200 | 1600 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.2/10 | 7.3/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
BMW 3 sērija has
|
Audi A3 has
| |