Ford Sierra 1989 vs BMW 3 series 1998
Body: | Hatchback | Sedan | |
---|---|---|---|
The hatchback generally has more luggage space thanks to a larger trunk door opening and the ability to convert the rear of the passenger compartment into luggage space. Sedans tend to be quieter than hatchbacks, due to a more isolated rear area. | |||
Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
Power: | 120 HP | 150 HP | |
Torque: | 171 NM | 190 NM | |
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10 seconds | 9.9 seconds | |
Ford Sierra engine produces 30 HP less power than BMW 3 series, whereas torque is 19 NM less than BMW 3 series. Due to the lower power, Ford Sierra reaches 100 km/h speed 0.1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.8 | 8.9 | |
Real fuel consumption: | 8.6 l/100km | 9.5 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 0.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than the BMW 3 series. | |||
Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 63 litres | |
Full fuel tank distance: | 760 km in combined cycle | 700 km in combined cycle | |
690 km with real consumption | 660 km with real consumption | ||
Ford Sierra gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Dimensions | |||
Length: | 4.42 m | 4.47 m | |
Width: | 1.69 m | 1.74 m | |
Height: | 1.41 m | 1.42 m | |
Ford Sierra is smaller. Ford Sierra is 5 cm shorter than the BMW 3 series, 5 cm narrower, while the height of Ford Sierra is 1 cm lower. | |||
Trunk capacity: | no data | 440 litres | |
Turning diameter: | 10 meters | 10 meters | |
Gross weight (kg): | 1`350 | 1`865 | |
Safety: | no data | no data | |
Quality: | no data | low | |
Average price (€): | 1800 | 2000 | |
Pros and Cons: |
Ford Sierra has
|
BMW 3 sērija has
| |