BMW 3 series 1987 vs Ford Mondeo 2000
| Body: | Cabrio | Sedan | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 129 HP | 145 HP | |
| Torque: | 164 NM | 190 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12 seconds | 9.8 seconds | |
|
Ford Mondeo is a more dynamic driving. BMW 3 series engine produces 16 HP less power than Ford Mondeo, whereas torque is 26 NM less than Ford Mondeo. Due to the lower power, BMW 3 series reaches 100 km/h speed 2.2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.5 | 8.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.7 l/100km | 8.5 l/100km | |
|
The Ford Mondeo is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification BMW 3 series consumes 1.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Ford Mondeo, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the BMW 3 series could require 225 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, BMW 3 series consumes 1.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Ford Mondeo. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 59 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 570 km in combined cycle | 730 km in combined cycle | |
| 730 km on highway | 980 km on highway | ||
| 560 km with real consumption | 690 km with real consumption | ||
| Ford Mondeo gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Ford Mondeo) 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: | 440'000 km | 560'000 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 Ford Mondeo engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 15 years | 7 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on BMW 5 sērija | 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.32 m | 4.73 m | |
| Width: | 1.64 m | 1.81 m | |
| Height: | 1.37 m | 1.43 m | |
|
BMW 3 series is smaller. BMW 3 series is 41 cm shorter than the Ford Mondeo, 17 cm narrower, while the height of BMW 3 series is 6 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 312 litres | 500 litres | |
|
Ford Mondeo has more luggage space. BMW 3 series has 188 litres less trunk space than the Ford Mondeo. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10 meters | 11.1 meters | |
| The turning circle of the BMW 3 series is 1.1 metres less than that of the Ford Mondeo, which means BMW 3 series can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`680 | 1`865 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | above average | |
| Ford Mondeo has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data BMW 3 series has serious deffects in 550 percent more cases than Ford Mondeo, so Ford Mondeo quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 11 400 | 1200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
BMW 3 sērija has
|
Ford Mondeo has
| |