BMW 3 series 1993 vs Volkswagen Polo 1995
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.4 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 102 HP | 60 HP | |
| Torque: | 150 NM | 116 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12 seconds | 14.9 seconds | |
|
BMW 3 series is more dynamic to drive. BMW 3 series engine produces 42 HP more power than Volkswagen Polo, whereas torque is 34 NM more than Volkswagen Polo. Thanks to more power BMW 3 series reaches 100 km/h speed 2.9 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.7 | 6.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.0 l/100km | 6.9 l/100km | |
|
The Volkswagen Polo is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification BMW 3 series consumes 1.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Polo, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the BMW 3 series could require 180 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, BMW 3 series consumes 1.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Polo. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 52 litres | 45 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 670 km in combined cycle | 690 km in combined cycle | |
| 880 km on highway | 880 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 (Volkswagen Polo) 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.21 m | 3.72 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.66 m | |
| Height: | 1.39 m | 1.42 m | |
|
BMW 3 series is larger, but slightly lower. BMW 3 series is 49 cm longer than the Volkswagen Polo, 4 cm wider, while the height of BMW 3 series is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 325 litres | 245 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1030 litres | 975 litres | |
|
BMW 3 series has more luggage capacity. BMW 3 series has 80 litres more trunk space than the Volkswagen Polo. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in BMW 3 series (by 55 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10 meters | 10.1 meters | |
| The turning circle of the BMW 3 series is 0.1 metres less than that of the Volkswagen Polo. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`635 | 1`400 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | below average | high | |
| Volkswagen Polo has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data BMW 3 series has serious deffects in 55 percent more cases than Volkswagen Polo, so Volkswagen Polo quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 2000 | 800 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.3/10 | 7.4/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
BMW 3 sērija has
|
Volkswagen Polo has
| |