BMW 3 series 1999 vs Ford Puma 1997
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.8 Petrol | 1.7 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: | 193 HP | 125 HP | |
| Torque: | 280 NM | 157 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7 seconds | 9.2 seconds | |
|
BMW 3 series is more dynamic to drive. BMW 3 series engine produces 68 HP more power than Ford Puma, whereas torque is 123 NM more than Ford Puma. Thanks to more power BMW 3 series reaches 100 km/h speed 2.2 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.1 | 7.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.8 l/100km | 7.8 l/100km | |
|
The Ford Puma is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification BMW 3 series consumes 1.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Ford Puma, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the BMW 3 series could require 255 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, BMW 3 series consumes 2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Ford Puma. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 63 litres | 40 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 690 km in combined cycle | 540 km in combined cycle | |
| 900 km on highway | 650 km on highway | ||
| 640 km with real consumption | 510 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 Puma) 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 | 350'000 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 BMW 3 series engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 7 years | 4 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including BMW 5 sērija, BMW 7 sērija, BMW Z3 | Used only for this car | |
| 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. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The BMW 3 series engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.49 m | 3.98 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.67 m | |
| Height: | 1.37 m | 1.34 m | |
|
BMW 3 series is larger. BMW 3 series is 51 cm longer than the Ford Puma, 9 cm wider, while the height of BMW 3 series is 3 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 410 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10 meters | 10 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`895 | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 3600 | 1000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
BMW 3 sērija has
|
Ford Puma has
| |