Skoda Octavia 1997 vs BMW 3 series 1999
| 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: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.9 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 101 HP | 105 HP | |
| Torque: | 145 NM | 165 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.2 seconds | 12 seconds | |
|
BMW 3 series is a more dynamic driving. Skoda Octavia engine produces 4 HP less power than BMW 3 series, whereas torque is 20 NM less than BMW 3 series. Due to the lower power, Skoda Octavia reaches 100 km/h speed 0.2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.8 | 7.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.6 l/100km | 8.3 l/100km | |
|
The Skoda Octavia is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. 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. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Skoda Octavia consumes 0.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the BMW 3 series. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 63 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 700 km in combined cycle | 790 km in combined cycle | |
| 900 km on highway | 1060 km on highway | ||
| 720 km with real consumption | 750 km with real consumption | ||
| BMW 3 series gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 480'000 km | 480'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 11 years | 9 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Volkswagen Golf, Volkswagen Polo, Seat Toledo, Seat Ibiza | Used only for this car | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Skoda Octavia might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.51 m | 4.47 m | |
| Width: | 1.73 m | 1.74 m | |
| Height: | 1.43 m | 1.42 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Skoda Octavia is 4 cm longer than the BMW 3 series, 1 cm narrower, while the height of Skoda Octavia is 1 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 528 litres | 440 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1330 litres | no data | |
|
Skoda Octavia has more luggage capacity. Skoda Octavia has 88 litres more trunk space than the BMW 3 series. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | 10 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Skoda Octavia is 0.8 metres more than that of the BMW 3 series, which means Skoda Octavia can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`765 | 1`785 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | above average | below average | |
| Skoda Octavia has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data BMW 3 series has serious deffects in 30 percent more cases than Skoda Octavia, so Skoda Octavia quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 2000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Skoda Octavia has
|
BMW 3 sērija has
| |