Skoda Octavia 1998 vs BMW 3 series 2002
| 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: | 1.8 Petrol | 1.8 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain and belt | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 116 HP | |
| Torque: | 210 NM | 175 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.5 seconds | 11 seconds | |
|
Skoda Octavia is more dynamic to drive. Skoda Octavia engine produces 34 HP more power than BMW 3 series, whereas torque is 35 NM more than BMW 3 series. Thanks to more power Skoda Octavia reaches 100 km/h speed 2.5 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.9 | 7.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.2 l/100km | 8.1 l/100km | |
|
The BMW 3 series is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Skoda Octavia consumes 0.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the BMW 3 series, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Skoda Octavia could require 120 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Skoda Octavia consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the BMW 3 series. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 63 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 690 km in combined cycle | 880 km in combined cycle | |
| 880 km on highway | 1140 km on highway | ||
| 670 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: | 440'000 km | 350'000 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 Skoda Octavia engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 9 years | 6 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 9 other car models, including Volkswagen Passat, Volkswagen Golf, Audi A4, Audi A3 | 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. | |||
| Skoda Octavia 1998 1.8 engine: The weakest link in this engine is the turbine, whose failure is contributed to by a faulty catalytic converter. The oil pump and chain tensioner also tend to have problems. | |||
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 |
1328 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`830 | 1`810 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | BMW 3 series has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Skoda Octavia has serious deffects in 40 percent more cases than BMW 3 series, so BMW 3 series quality is probably significantly better | ||
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 2800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Skoda Octavia has
|
BMW 3 sērija has
| |