BMW 3 series 1993 vs Audi 80 1992
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.5 Diesel | 2.6 Petrol | |
| Diesel (BMW 3 series) engines typically outperform gasoline engines in terms of fuel efficiency and low-end torque. This makes them more economical and better suited for towing or long-distance travel. However, gasoline (Audi 80) engines mostly are lighter, quieter, and offer better acceleration and responsiveness, especially in smaller vehicles. For more information, see the article "Diesel or Petrol: Fuel Economy and Key Differences." | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 143 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 260 NM | 225 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10 seconds | 9.3 seconds | |
|
Audi 80 is a more dynamic driving. BMW 3 series engine produces 7 HP less power than Audi 80, but torque is 35 NM more than Audi 80. Due to the lower power, BMW 3 series reaches 100 km/h speed 0.7 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.3 | 9.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.5 l/100km | 10.2 l/100km | |
|
The BMW 3 series is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification BMW 3 series consumes 1.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Audi 80, which means that by driving the BMW 3 series over 15,000 km in a year you can save 285 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, BMW 3 series consumes 2.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Audi 80. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 65 litres | 66 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 890 km in combined cycle | 710 km in combined cycle | |
| 1160 km on highway | 980 km on highway | ||
| 860 km with real consumption | 640 km with real consumption | ||
| BMW 3 series gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Ground clearance: | 130 mm (5.1 inches) | 135 mm (5.3 inches) | |
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.43 m | 4.48 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.39 m | 1.41 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. BMW 3 series is 5 cm shorter than the Audi 80, width is practically the same , while the height of BMW 3 series is 2 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 435 litres | 430 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
no data | 710 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10 meters | 11.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the BMW 3 series is 1.2 metres less than that of the Audi 80, which means BMW 3 series can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight: | 1`825 kg | 1`790 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`425 kg | 1`330 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 400 kg | 460 kg | |
| BMW 3 series load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 15 procentiem less than Audi 80. Therefore, Audi 80 is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | low | below average | |
| Audi 80 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data BMW 3 series has serious deffects in 10 percent more cases than Audi 80, so Audi 80 quality is probably slightly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 2800 | 1000 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.2/10 | 7.5/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
BMW 3 sērija has
|
Audi 80 has
| |