BMW Z4 2003 vs SAAB 9-3 2003
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.5 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 192 HP | 210 HP | |
| Torque: | 245 NM | 300 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7 seconds | 8.8 seconds | |
| BMW Z4 engine produces 18 HP less power than SAAB 9-3, whereas torque is 55 NM less than SAAB 9-3. Despite less power, BMW Z4 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.8 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.9 | 9.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.5 l/100km | 9.3 l/100km | |
|
By specification BMW Z4 consumes 0.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the SAAB 9-3, which means that by driving the BMW Z4 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 30 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, BMW Z4 consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the SAAB 9-3. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 63 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 610 km in combined cycle | 690 km in combined cycle | |
| 790 km on highway | 860 km on highway | ||
| 570 km with real consumption | 670 km with real consumption | ||
| SAAB 9-3 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (SAAB 9-3) 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 Z4) 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 | 370'000 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 BMW Z4 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 7 years | 10 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including BMW 5 sērija, BMW 3 sērija, BMW X3 | 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.09 m | 4.64 m | |
| Width: | 1.78 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.30 m | 1.43 m | |
| BMW Z4 is 55 cm shorter than the SAAB 9-3, 2 cm wider, while the height of BMW Z4 is 13 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 240 litres | 235 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
260 litres | no data | |
| BMW Z4 has 5 litres more trunk space than the SAAB 9-3. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 9.8 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the BMW Z4 is 1.2 metres less than that of the SAAB 9-3, which means BMW Z4 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`560 | 2`090 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | above average | high | |
| SAAB 9-3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data BMW Z4 has serious deffects in 25 percent more cases than SAAB 9-3, so SAAB 9-3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 8600 | 7000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
BMW Z4 has
|
SAAB 9-3 has
| |