BMW 3 series 1999 vs Honda Prelude 1996
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.8 Petrol | 2.0 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 | 133 HP | |
| Torque: | 280 NM | 179 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7 seconds | 9.2 seconds | |
|
BMW 3 series is more dynamic to drive. BMW 3 series engine produces 60 HP more power than Honda Prelude, whereas torque is 101 NM more than Honda Prelude. Thanks to more power BMW 3 series reaches 100 km/h speed 2.2 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.1 | 9.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.8 l/100km | 9.0 l/100km | |
|
The Honda Prelude is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification BMW 3 series consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Honda Prelude, which means that by driving the BMW 3 series over 15,000 km in a year you can save 15 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, BMW 3 series consumes 0.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Honda Prelude. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 63 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 690 km in combined cycle | 650 km in combined cycle | |
| 900 km on highway | 820 km on highway | ||
| 640 km with real consumption | 660 km with real consumption | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Honda Prelude) 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 | 13 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. | |||
| 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 | 4.54 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.75 m | |
| Height: | 1.37 m | 1.32 m | |
| BMW 3 series is 5 cm shorter than the Honda Prelude, 1 cm wider, while the height of BMW 3 series is 5 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 410 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the BMW 3 series is 1 metres less than that of the Honda Prelude, which means BMW 3 series can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`895 | 1`200 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 2400 | 1200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
BMW 3 sērija has
|
Honda Prelude has
| |