BMW 3 series 1999 vs Mazda 323 1989
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.9 Petrol | 1.8 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 105 HP | 106 HP | |
| Torque: | 165 NM | 151 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12 seconds | 8.8 seconds | |
|
Mazda 323 is a more dynamic driving. BMW 3 series engine produces 1 HP less power than Mazda 323, but torque is 14 NM more than Mazda 323. Due to the lower power, BMW 3 series reaches 100 km/h speed 3.2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.6 | 7.8 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.2 l/100km | 8.6 l/100km | |
|
The BMW 3 series is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification BMW 3 series consumes 0.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 323, which means that by driving the BMW 3 series over 15,000 km in a year you can save 30 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, BMW 3 series consumes 0.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 323. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 52 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 680 km in combined cycle | 700 km in combined cycle | |
| 630 km with real consumption | 630 km with real consumption | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Mazda 323) 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: | 480'000 km | 440'000 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 BMW 3 series engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 9 years | 6 years | |
| 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: | 4.21 m | 4.26 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.68 m | |
| Height: | 1.39 m | 1.34 m | |
| BMW 3 series is 5 cm shorter than the Mazda 323, 2 cm wider, while the height of BMW 3 series is 5 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 325 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1030 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10 meters | 9.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the BMW 3 series is 0.2 metres more than that of the Mazda 323. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`635 | 1`550 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | BMW 3 series has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mazda 323 has serious deffects in 35 percent more cases than BMW 3 series, so BMW 3 series quality is probably significantly better | ||
| Average price (€): | 2000 | 1000 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.3/10 | 7.8/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
BMW 3 sērija has
|
Mazda 323 has
| |