Chrysler Sebring 2003 vs BMW 3 series 2003
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 141 HP | 143 HP | |
| Torque: | 188 NM | 200 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.3 seconds | 10 seconds | |
|
BMW 3 series is a more dynamic driving. Chrysler Sebring engine produces 2 HP less power than BMW 3 series, whereas torque is 12 NM less than BMW 3 series. Due to the lower power, Chrysler Sebring reaches 100 km/h speed 2.3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.1 | 7.8 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.5 l/100km | 8.3 l/100km | |
|
The BMW 3 series is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Chrysler Sebring consumes 1.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the BMW 3 series, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Chrysler Sebring could require 195 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Chrysler Sebring consumes 1.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the BMW 3 series. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 63 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 650 km in combined cycle | 800 km in combined cycle | |
| 880 km on highway | 1030 km on highway | ||
| 630 km with real consumption | 750 km with real consumption | ||
| BMW 3 series gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Chrysler Sebring) 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. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 370'000 km | 380'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 11 years | 6 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Chrysler PT Cruiser, Mitsubishi Eclipse | 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. Chrysler Sebring might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.92 m | 4.49 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.40 m | 1.37 m | |
| Chrysler Sebring is 43 cm longer than the BMW 3 series, width is practically the same , while the height of Chrysler Sebring is 3 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 320 litres | 260 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 300 litres | |
|
Chrysler Sebring has more luggage capacity. Chrysler Sebring has 60 litres more trunk space than the BMW 3 series. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 10 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Chrysler Sebring is 1 metres more than that of the BMW 3 series, which means Chrysler Sebring can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`990 | 1`925 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | average | |
| Average price (€): | 3200 | 6200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Chrysler Sebring has
|
BMW 3 sērija has
| |