BMW 3 series 2008 vs Audi A5 2009
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.0 Diesel | 3.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 245 HP | 240 HP | |
| Torque: | 540 NM | 500 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 6.4 seconds | 6.4 seconds | |
| BMW 3 series engine produces 5 HP more power than Audi A5, whereas torque is 40 NM more than Audi A5. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.1 | 6.8 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.1 l/100km | 8.4 l/100km | |
|
The BMW 3 series is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification BMW 3 series consumes 0.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Audi A5, which means that by driving the BMW 3 series over 15,000 km in a year you can save 105 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, BMW 3 series consumes 1.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Audi A5. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 63 litres | 65 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1030 km in combined cycle | 950 km in combined cycle | |
| 1210 km on highway | 1120 km on highway | ||
| 880 km with real consumption | 770 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 A5) 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: | 420'000 km | 480'000 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 A5 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 17 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including BMW 5 sērija, BMW X5, BMW 7 sērija, BMW X6 | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Audi A6, Audi A4, Audi Q5 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. BMW 3 series might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.58 m | 4.63 m | |
| Width: | 1.78 m | 1.85 m | |
| Height: | 1.38 m | 1.38 m | |
|
BMW 3 series is smaller. BMW 3 series is 5 cm shorter than the Audi A5, 7 cm narrower the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 210 litres | 320 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
350 litres | 750 litres | |
|
Audi A5 has more luggage space. BMW 3 series has 110 litres less trunk space than the Audi A5. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Audi A5 (by 400 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | no data | 11.4 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 2`360 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | average | high | |
| Audi A5 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data BMW 3 series has serious deffects in 20 percent more cases than Audi A5, so Audi A5 quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 9600 | 9600 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.0/10 | 9.0/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
BMW 3 sērija has
|
Audi A5 has
| |