BMW 3 series 2003 vs Audi A3 2004
| 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: | Automatic | Automatic | |
| Engine: | 3.0 Diesel | 3.2 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 A3) 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: | 204 HP | 250 HP | |
| Torque: | 410 NM | 320 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7.4 seconds | 6.3 seconds | |
|
Audi A3 is a more dynamic driving. BMW 3 series engine produces 46 HP less power than Audi A3, but torque is 90 NM more than Audi A3. Due to the lower power, BMW 3 series reaches 100 km/h speed 1.1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.7 | 9.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.4 l/100km | 11.4 l/100km | |
|
The BMW 3 series is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification BMW 3 series consumes 2.2 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 330 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, BMW 3 series consumes 3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Audi A3. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 63 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 810 km in combined cycle | 600 km in combined cycle | |
| 1030 km on highway | 780 km on highway | ||
| 750 km with real consumption | 520 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) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
| BMW 3 sērija 2003 3.0 engine: The BMW M57 engine is regarded as one of the best German-built power units. Its inline-six layout is praised for reliability, and cars equipped with this engine are often more desirable on the used market. Despite delivering ... More about BMW 3 sērija 2003 3.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.47 m | 4.29 m | |
| Width: | 1.74 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.42 m | |
| BMW 3 series is 18 cm longer than the Audi A3, 2 cm narrower the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 440 litres | 370 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
no data | 1120 litres | |
|
BMW 3 series has more luggage capacity. BMW 3 series has 70 litres more trunk space than the Audi A3. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10 meters | 10.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the BMW 3 series is 0.7 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: | 2`055 kg | 2`125 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`655 kg | 1`535 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 400 kg | 590 kg | |
| BMW 3 series load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 48 procentiem less than Audi A3. Therefore, Audi A3 is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | low | above average | |
| Audi A3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data BMW 3 series has serious deffects in 30 percent more cases than Audi A3, so Audi A3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 2400 | 2800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
BMW 3 sērija has
|
Audi A3 has
| |