BMW 3 series 1993 vs Skoda Octavia 1997
| 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 | 101 HP | |
| Torque: | 150 NM | 145 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12 seconds | 12.2 seconds | |
|
BMW 3 series is more dynamic to drive. BMW 3 series engine produces 1 HP more power than Skoda Octavia, whereas torque is 5 NM more than Skoda Octavia. Thanks to more power BMW 3 series reaches 100 km/h speed 0.2 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.7 | 7.8 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.0 l/100km | 7.6 l/100km | |
|
The Skoda Octavia 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 Skoda Octavia, 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 Skoda Octavia. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 52 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 670 km in combined cycle | 700 km in combined cycle | |
| 880 km on highway | 900 km on highway | ||
| 650 km with real consumption | 720 km with real consumption | ||
| 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) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Skoda Octavia) 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 | 480'000 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 Skoda Octavia engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 9 years | 11 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Volkswagen Golf, Volkswagen Polo, Seat Ibiza, Seat Toledo | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Skoda Octavia might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Skoda Octavia 1997 1.6 engine: This is a simple and reliable engine with an impressive lifespan when properly maintained. However, many of its issues stem from air leaks, so checking hoses and the intake manifold is essential. The ignition ... More about Skoda Octavia 1997 1.6 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.21 m | 4.51 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.73 m | |
| Height: | 1.39 m | 1.43 m | |
|
BMW 3 series is smaller. BMW 3 series is 30 cm shorter than the Skoda Octavia, 3 cm narrower, while the height of BMW 3 series is 4 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 325 litres | 528 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1030 litres | 1330 litres | |
|
Skoda Octavia has more luggage space. BMW 3 series has 203 litres less trunk space than the Skoda Octavia. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Skoda Octavia (by 300 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the BMW 3 series is 0.8 metres less than that of the Skoda Octavia, which means BMW 3 series can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`635 | 1`765 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | above average | |
| Skoda Octavia has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data BMW 3 series has serious deffects in 20 percent more cases than Skoda Octavia, so Skoda Octavia quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 2000 | 1000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
BMW 3 sērija has
|
Skoda Octavia has
| |