BMW 3 series 1999 vs Audi A3 1996
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.9 Petrol | 1.8 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain and belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 105 HP | 125 HP | |
| Torque: | 165 NM | 173 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13 seconds | 11.2 seconds | |
|
Audi A3 is a more dynamic driving. BMW 3 series engine produces 20 HP less power than Audi A3, whereas torque is 8 NM less than Audi A3. Due to the lower power, BMW 3 series reaches 100 km/h speed 1.8 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.9 | 8.9 | |
| Fuel tank capacity: | 52 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 580 km in combined cycle | 610 km in combined cycle | |
| 730 km on highway | 820 km on highway | ||
| 550 km with real consumption | 560 km with real consumption | ||
| Audi A3 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. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 480'000 km | 460'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 9 years | 4 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Volkswagen Golf, Audi A6, Audi A4, Skoda Octavia, Volkswagen Bora | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.21 m | 4.15 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.74 m | |
| Height: | 1.39 m | 1.42 m | |
| BMW 3 series is 6 cm longer than the Audi A3, 4 cm narrower, while the height of BMW 3 series is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 325 litres | 350 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1030 litres | 1110 litres | |
|
Audi A3 has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, BMW 3 series has 25 litres less trunk space than the Audi A3. This could mean that the BMW 3 series uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Audi A3 (by 80 litres). | |||
| 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`675 | 1`650 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | average | |
| Audi A3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data BMW 3 series has serious deffects in 25 percent more cases than Audi A3, so Audi A3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 2000 | 1000 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.3/10 | 8.0/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
BMW 3 sērija has
|
Audi A3 has
| |