BMW 3 series 1995 vs Seat Toledo 1995
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.7 Diesel | 1.9 Diesel | |
| 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: | 90 HP | 64 HP | |
| Torque: | 190 NM | 124 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 14 seconds | 17.9 seconds | |
|
BMW 3 series is more dynamic to drive. BMW 3 series engine produces 26 HP more power than Seat Toledo, whereas torque is 66 NM more than Seat Toledo. Thanks to more power BMW 3 series reaches 100 km/h speed 3.9 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.4 | 6.0 | |
|
The Seat Toledo is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. BMW 3 series consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Seat Toledo, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the BMW 3 series could require 60 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 52 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 810 km in combined cycle | 910 km in combined cycle | |
| 1040 km on highway | 1140 km on highway | ||
| Seat Toledo gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| 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 (Seat Toledo) 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 | 700'000 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 Seat Toledo engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 14 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including Volkswagen Golf, Audi 80, Volkswagen Polo, Skoda Felicia | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Seat Toledo might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.21 m | 4.32 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.66 m | |
| Height: | 1.39 m | 1.42 m | |
| BMW 3 series is 11 cm shorter than the Seat Toledo, 4 cm wider, while the height of BMW 3 series is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 325 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1030 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10 meters | 10.5 meters | |
| The turning circle of the BMW 3 series is 0.5 metres less than that of the Seat Toledo, which means BMW 3 series can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`675 | 1`000 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | low | |
| BMW 3 series has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Seat Toledo, so BMW 3 series quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 1800 | 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
BMW 3 sērija has
|
Seat Toledo has
| |