BMW 3 series 2004 vs Alfa Romeo 145 1999
| Body: | Cabrio | Hatchback | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 1.9 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 105 HP | |
| Torque: | 330 NM | 255 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.7 seconds | 10.4 seconds | |
|
BMW 3 series is more dynamic to drive. BMW 3 series engine produces 45 HP more power than Alfa Romeo 145, whereas torque is 75 NM more than Alfa Romeo 145. Thanks to more power BMW 3 series reaches 100 km/h speed 0.7 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.3 | 5.7 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.4 l/100km | 5.8 l/100km | |
|
The Alfa Romeo 145 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification BMW 3 series consumes 0.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Alfa Romeo 145, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the BMW 3 series could require 90 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, BMW 3 series consumes 0.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Alfa Romeo 145. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 63 litres | 61 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1000 km in combined cycle | 1070 km in combined cycle | |
| 1260 km on highway | 1290 km on highway | ||
| 980 km with real consumption | 1050 km with real consumption | ||
| Alfa Romeo 145 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 (Alfa Romeo 145) 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 | 4.06 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.71 m | |
| Height: | 1.37 m | 1.43 m | |
|
BMW 3 series is larger, but lower. BMW 3 series is 43 cm longer than the Alfa Romeo 145, 5 cm wider, while the height of BMW 3 series is 6 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 260 litres | 320 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
300 litres | 1130 litres | |
|
Alfa Romeo 145 has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, BMW 3 series has 60 litres less trunk space than the Alfa Romeo 145. This could mean that the BMW 3 series uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Alfa Romeo 145 (by 830 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10 meters | 10.5 meters | |
| The turning circle of the BMW 3 series is 0.5 metres less than that of the Alfa Romeo 145, which means BMW 3 series can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`025 | 1`730 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | high | low | |
| BMW 3 series has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Alfa Romeo 145 has serious deffects in 840 percent more cases than BMW 3 series, so BMW 3 series quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 6200 | 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
BMW 3 sērija has
|
Alfa Romeo 145 has
| |