Ford Sierra 1990 vs BMW 3 series 1985
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 120 HP | 129 HP | |
| Torque: | 171 NM | 174 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.7 seconds | 12 seconds | |
| Ford Sierra engine produces 9 HP less power than BMW 3 series, whereas torque is 3 NM less than BMW 3 series. Despite less power, Ford Sierra reaches 100 km/h speed 0.3 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.8 | 8.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.2 l/100km | 10.3 l/100km | |
|
The Ford Sierra is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Ford Sierra consumes 0.8 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 120 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Ford Sierra consumes 2.1 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 | 630 km in combined cycle | |
| 730 km with real consumption | 530 km with real consumption | ||
| Ford Sierra gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
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`590 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | below average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 2000 | 4200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Sierra has
|
BMW 3 sērija has
| |