Ford Sierra 1990 vs BMW 3 series 1985
Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
---|---|---|---|
Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
Power: | 120 HP | 129 HP | |
Torque: | 171 NM | 174 NM | |
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10 seconds | 10 seconds | |
Ford Sierra engine produces 9 HP less power than BMW 3 series, whereas torque is 3 NM less than BMW 3 series. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.8 | 8.9 | |
Real fuel consumption: | 8.6 l/100km | 9.4 l/100km | |
The Ford Sierra is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Ford Sierra consumes 1.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the BMW 3 series, which means that by driving the Ford Sierra over 15,000 km in a year you can save 165 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Ford Sierra consumes 0.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the BMW 3 series. | |||
Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 55 litres | |
Full fuel tank distance: | 760 km in combined cycle | 610 km in combined cycle | |
690 km with real consumption | 580 km with real consumption | ||
Ford Sierra gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Dimensions | |||
Length: | 4.47 m | 4.32 m | |
Width: | 1.70 m | 1.64 m | |
Height: | 1.41 m | 1.38 m | |
Ford Sierra is larger. Ford Sierra is 15 cm longer than the BMW 3 series, 6 cm wider, while the height of Ford Sierra is 3 cm higher. | |||
Trunk capacity: | no data | 425 litres | |
Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 425 litres | |
Turning diameter: | 10 meters | 10 meters | |
Gross weight (kg): | 1`350 | 1`570 | |
Safety: | no data | no data | |
Quality: | below average | no data | |
Average price (€): | 2000 | 4400 | |
Pros and Cons: |
Ford Sierra has
|
BMW 3 sērija has
| |