BMW 3 series 2003 vs Volvo C70 1999
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 143 HP | 163 HP | |
| Torque: | 200 NM | 230 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10 seconds | 9.9 seconds | |
| BMW 3 series engine produces 20 HP less power than Volvo C70, whereas torque is 30 NM less than Volvo C70. Due to the lower power, BMW 3 series reaches 100 km/h speed 0.1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.8 | 9.7 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.3 l/100km | 9.7 l/100km | |
|
The BMW 3 series is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification BMW 3 series consumes 1.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo C70, which means that by driving the BMW 3 series over 15,000 km in a year you can save 285 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, BMW 3 series consumes 1.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo C70. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 63 litres | 68 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 800 km in combined cycle | 700 km in combined cycle | |
| 1030 km on highway | 910 km on highway | ||
| 750 km with real consumption | 700 km with real consumption | ||
| BMW 3 series gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Volvo C70) 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.49 m | 4.72 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.82 m | |
| Height: | 1.37 m | 1.43 m | |
|
BMW 3 series is smaller. BMW 3 series is 23 cm shorter than the Volvo C70, 6 cm narrower, while the height of BMW 3 series is 6 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 260 litres | 262 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
300 litres | no data | |
| BMW 3 series has 2 litres less trunk space than the Volvo C70. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10 meters | 11.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the BMW 3 series is 1.7 metres less than that of the Volvo C70, which means BMW 3 series can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`925 | 2`000 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | average | |
| BMW 3 series has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Volvo C70, so BMW 3 series quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 6000 | 2200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
BMW 3 sērija has
|
Volvo C70 has
| |