BMW 3 series 1993 vs Fiat Brava 1998
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.6 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: | 102 HP | 103 HP | |
| Torque: | 150 NM | 144 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12 seconds | 11.5 seconds | |
|
Fiat Brava is a more dynamic driving. BMW 3 series engine produces 1 HP less power than Fiat Brava, but torque is 6 NM more than Fiat Brava. Due to the lower power, BMW 3 series reaches 100 km/h speed 0.5 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.7 | 7.8 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.0 l/100km | 7.6 l/100km | |
|
The Fiat Brava is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification BMW 3 series consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Fiat Brava, which means that by driving the BMW 3 series over 15,000 km in a year you can save 15 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, BMW 3 series consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Fiat Brava. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 52 litres | 50 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 670 km in combined cycle | 640 km in combined cycle | |
| 880 km on highway | 810 km on highway | ||
| 650 km with real consumption | 650 km with real consumption | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Fiat Brava) 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 | 390'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 9 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Used also on Fiat Marea | |
| 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 | 4.19 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.74 m | |
| Height: | 1.39 m | 1.41 m | |
| BMW 3 series is 2 cm longer than the Fiat Brava, 4 cm narrower, while the height of BMW 3 series is 2 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 325 litres | 380 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1030 litres | 775 litres | |
| Despite its longer length, BMW 3 series has 55 litres less trunk space than the Fiat Brava. 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 BMW 3 series (by 255 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the BMW 3 series is 0.4 metres less than that of the Fiat Brava, which means BMW 3 series can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`635 | 1`630 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | low | low | |
| Average price (€): | 2000 | 1200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
BMW 3 sērija has
|
Fiat Brava has
| |