BMW 3 series 1996 vs Audi A3 1996
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.9 Petrol | 1.8 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 140 HP | 125 HP | |
| Torque: | 180 NM | 173 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.9 seconds | 9.6 seconds | |
| BMW 3 series engine produces 15 HP more power than Audi A3, whereas torque is 7 NM more than Audi A3. Despite the higher power, BMW 3 series reaches 100 km/h speed 0.3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.9 | 8.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.0 l/100km | 8.6 l/100km | |
|
The BMW 3 series is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification BMW 3 series consumes 0.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Audi A3, which means that by driving the BMW 3 series over 15,000 km in a year you can save 60 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, BMW 3 series consumes 0.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Audi A3. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 52 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 650 km in combined cycle | 660 km in combined cycle | |
| 880 km on highway | 870 km on highway | ||
| 650 km with real consumption | 630 km with real consumption | ||
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. | |||
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`660 | 1`650 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | above average | |
| Audi A3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data BMW 3 series has serious deffects in 30 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
| |