BMW 3 series 1999 vs Ford Cougar 1998
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.8 Petrol | 2.5 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 193 HP | 170 HP | |
| Torque: | 280 NM | 220 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7 seconds | 8.6 seconds | |
|
BMW 3 series is more dynamic to drive. BMW 3 series engine produces 23 HP more power than Ford Cougar, whereas torque is 60 NM more than Ford Cougar. Thanks to more power BMW 3 series reaches 100 km/h speed 1.6 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.1 | 9.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.8 l/100km | 10.9 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 Ford Cougar, 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 1.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Ford Cougar. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 63 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 690 km in combined cycle | 630 km in combined cycle | |
| 900 km on highway | 820 km on highway | ||
| 640 km with real consumption | 550 km with real consumption | ||
| BMW 3 series 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 (Ford Cougar) 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 | 420'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 7 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including BMW 5 sērija, BMW 7 sērija, BMW Z3 | Used also on Ford Mondeo | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. BMW 3 series might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.49 m | 4.70 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.77 m | |
| Height: | 1.37 m | 1.32 m | |
|
BMW 3 series is smaller, but higher. BMW 3 series is 21 cm shorter than the Ford Cougar, 1 cm narrower, while the height of BMW 3 series is 5 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 410 litres | 430 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 930 litres | |
| BMW 3 series has 20 litres less trunk space than the Ford Cougar. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10 meters | 10.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the BMW 3 series is 0.9 metres less than that of the Ford Cougar, which means BMW 3 series can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`895 | 1`825 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 3200 | 1600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
BMW 3 sērija has
|
Ford Cougar has
| |