BMW 3 series 2010 vs Volkswagen EOS 2006
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 184 HP | 140 HP | |
| Torque: | 380 NM | 320 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.4 seconds | 10.4 seconds | |
|
BMW 3 series is more dynamic to drive. BMW 3 series engine produces 44 HP more power than Volkswagen EOS, whereas torque is 60 NM more than Volkswagen EOS. Thanks to more power BMW 3 series reaches 100 km/h speed 2 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.6 | 6.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.4 l/100km | 6.2 l/100km | |
|
By specification BMW 3 series consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen EOS, which means that by driving the BMW 3 series over 15,000 km in a year you can save 75 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, BMW 3 series consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen EOS. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 61 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1080 km in combined cycle | 900 km in combined cycle | |
| 1290 km on highway | 1100 km on highway | ||
| 950 km with real consumption | 880 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 (Volkswagen EOS) 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. | |||
| Ground clearance: | 138 mm (5.4 inches) | 106 mm (4.2 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, BMW 3 series can perform better on bad roads - it can go over higher obstacles and bumps. At the same time, the higher ground clearance can reduce stability and handling on paved roads, especially at higher speeds. Note, however, that this BMW 3 series version does not have 4x4 drive, which is very important in poor road conditions. | |||
| BMW 3 sērija 2010 2.0 engine: Because of problems with the timing chain, which tends to stretch at 100,000 km, the BMW N47 engine is sometimes called the worst BMW engine. Replacing the timing chain also requires removing the engine from ... More about BMW 3 sērija 2010 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.61 m | 4.41 m | |
| Width: | 1.78 m | 1.79 m | |
| Height: | 1.38 m | 1.44 m | |
| BMW 3 series is 20 cm longer than the Volkswagen EOS, width is practically the same , while the height of BMW 3 series is 6 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 210 litres | 205 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
350 litres | 380 litres | |
| BMW 3 series has 5 litres more trunk space than the Volkswagen EOS. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Volkswagen EOS (by 30 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 10.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the BMW 3 series is 0.1 metres more than that of the Volkswagen EOS. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`100 | 2`010 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | above average | |
| Volkswagen EOS has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data BMW 3 series has serious deffects in 15 percent more cases than Volkswagen EOS, so Volkswagen EOS quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 13 200 | 5000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
BMW 3 sērija has
|
Volkswagen EOS has
| |