Skoda Octavia 2004 vs BMW 3 series 2005
| 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 | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain and belt | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 129 HP | |
| Torque: | 200 NM | 180 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.3 seconds | 10 seconds | |
|
Skoda Octavia is more dynamic to drive. Skoda Octavia engine produces 21 HP more power than BMW 3 series, whereas torque is 20 NM more than BMW 3 series. Thanks to more power Skoda Octavia reaches 100 km/h speed 0.7 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.2 | 7.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.3 l/100km | 8.1 l/100km | |
|
By specification Skoda Octavia consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the BMW 3 series, which means that by driving the Skoda Octavia over 15,000 km in a year you can save 15 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Skoda Octavia consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the BMW 3 series. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 63 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 760 km in combined cycle | 860 km in combined cycle | |
| 1000 km on highway | 1100 km on highway | ||
| 660 km with real consumption | 770 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: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 360'000 km | 420'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a BMW 3 series engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 11 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including BMW 1 sērija, BMW X3, BMW X1, BMW Z4 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. BMW 3 series might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.57 m | 4.52 m | |
| Width: | 1.77 m | 1.82 m | |
| Height: | 1.46 m | 1.42 m | |
| Skoda Octavia is 5 cm longer than the BMW 3 series, 5 cm narrower, while the height of Skoda Octavia is 4 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 560 litres | 460 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1350 litres | no data | |
|
Skoda Octavia has more luggage capacity. Skoda Octavia has 100 litres more trunk space than the BMW 3 series. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.2 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Skoda Octavia is 0.8 metres less than that of the BMW 3 series, which means Skoda Octavia can be easier 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 (kg): | 1`995 | 1`880 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | average | above average | |
| BMW 3 series has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Skoda Octavia, so BMW 3 series quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 1800 | 3800 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.9/10 | 7.7/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Skoda Octavia has
|
BMW 3 sērija has
| |