BMW 3 series 2000 vs Skoda Octavia 2000
| Body: | Cabrio | Hatchback | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 2.5 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: | 192 HP | 115 HP | |
| Torque: | 245 NM | 170 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7.7 seconds | 10.8 seconds | |
|
BMW 3 series is more dynamic to drive. BMW 3 series engine produces 77 HP more power than Skoda Octavia, whereas torque is 75 NM more than Skoda Octavia. Thanks to more power BMW 3 series reaches 100 km/h speed 3.1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.6 | 8.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.7 l/100km | 8.2 l/100km | |
|
The Skoda Octavia is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification BMW 3 series consumes 1.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Skoda Octavia, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the BMW 3 series could require 240 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, BMW 3 series consumes 1.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Skoda Octavia. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 63 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 650 km in combined cycle | 680 km in combined cycle | |
| 840 km on highway | 900 km on highway | ||
| 640 km with real consumption | 670 km with real consumption | ||
| 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) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 440'000 km | 580'000 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 Skoda Octavia 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 X3, BMW Z4 | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Volkswagen Golf, Volkswagen Bora, Volkswagen Beetle | |
| 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 | 4.51 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.73 m | |
| Height: | 1.37 m | 1.43 m | |
| BMW 3 series is 2 cm shorter than the Skoda Octavia, 3 cm wider, while the height of BMW 3 series is 6 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 300 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
300 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the BMW 3 series is 0.8 metres less than that of the Skoda Octavia, which means BMW 3 series can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`960 | no data | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | below average | average | |
| Skoda Octavia has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data BMW 3 series has serious deffects in 15 percent more cases than Skoda Octavia, so Skoda Octavia quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 6000 | 1200 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.8/10 | 5.3/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
BMW 3 sērija has
|
Skoda Octavia has
| |