Jeep Wrangler 2017 vs BMW 3 series 2001
| Body: | Crossover / SUV | Estate car / wagon | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Crossovers and SUVs have better off-road capabilities (higher ground clearance, can have 4x4 drive), they are preferable for driving on unpaved roads and rural areas. Also, the driver's seating position is higher in a crossover or SUVs, which provides better visibility also in city. This usually comes at the cost of higher fuel consumption, increased weight and higher maintenance costs. | |||
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 270 HP | 143 HP | |
| Torque: | 400 NM | 200 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | n/a seconds | 10 seconds | |
| Jeep Wrangler engine produces 127 HP more power than BMW 3 series, whereas torque is 200 NM more than BMW 3 series. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.8 | 8.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 12.4 l/100km | 9.2 l/100km | |
|
The BMW 3 series is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Jeep Wrangler consumes 1.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the BMW 3 series, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Jeep Wrangler could require 240 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Jeep Wrangler consumes 3.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the BMW 3 series. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 70 litres | 63 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 710 km in combined cycle | 760 km in combined cycle | |
| 740 km on highway | 980 km on highway | ||
| 560 km with real consumption | 680 km with real consumption | ||
| BMW 3 series gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | |
| BMW 3 sērija 2001 2.0 engine: The BMW N43 engine is built around a lightweight alloy cylinder block with a twin-cam, 16-valve head. It uses a dual-pump fuel delivery system—one located inside the tank to transfer fuel and supply the high-pressure pump, which then boosts fuel pressure up to 200 bar. Notably, the system lacks a fine fuel filter and relies only on a ... More about BMW 3 sērija 2001 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.24 m | 4.48 m | |
| Width: | 1.88 m | 1.74 m | |
| Height: | 1.87 m | 1.41 m | |
| Jeep Wrangler is 24 cm shorter than the BMW 3 series, 14 cm wider, while the height of Jeep Wrangler is 46 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 203 litres | 435 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
508 litres | 1345 litres | |
|
BMW 3 series has more luggage space. Jeep Wrangler has 232 litres less trunk space than the BMW 3 series. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in BMW 3 series (by 837 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.5 meters | 10 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Jeep Wrangler is 0.5 metres more than that of the BMW 3 series, which means Jeep Wrangler can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Power steering: | Electric power steering | Hydraulic power steering | |
| Electric power steering is simpler, quieter, more fuel-efficient, more configurable and provides additional features such as auto-steering for lane assist and parking. The disadvantages of electric power steering are possible overheating under prolonged load conditions and insufficient feedback (feeling) during steering. | |||
| Gross weight: | no data | 1`955 kg | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | no data | below average | |
| Average price (€): | no data | 2200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Jeep Wrangler has
|
BMW 3 sērija has
| |