Skoda Superb 2002 vs BMW 5 series 2000
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.9 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| 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: | 130 HP | 136 HP | |
| Torque: | 285 NM | 280 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.4 seconds | 11 seconds | |
|
Skoda Superb is more dynamic to drive. Skoda Superb engine produces 6 HP less power than BMW 5 series, but torque is 5 NM more than BMW 5 series. Despite less power, Skoda Superb reaches 100 km/h speed 0.6 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.7 | 5.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.2 l/100km | 6.5 l/100km | |
|
The Skoda Superb is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Skoda Superb consumes 0.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the BMW 5 series, which means that by driving the Skoda Superb over 15,000 km in a year you can save 30 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Skoda Superb consumes 0.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the BMW 5 series. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 62 litres | 70 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1080 km in combined cycle | 1180 km in combined cycle | |
| 1340 km on highway | 1480 km on highway | ||
| 1000 km with real consumption | 1070 km with real consumption | ||
| BMW 5 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) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Skoda Superb) have better traction on slippery roads and when climbing hills, better fuel economy, and are less expensive to purchase. On the disadvantage side, FWD cars usually have less towing capacity, poorer acceleration and harder handling. Rear-wheel drive cars (BMW 5 series) have better handling on dry roads, better acceleration, more even weight distribution and more fun to drive. RWD is also better for towing large loads. The cons of rear-wheel drive are less interior and trunk space and more difficulty maneuvering in wet and snowy conditions. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 480'000 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 5 series engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 8 years | 9 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Volkswagen Passat, Audi A6, Audi A4 | Used also on BMW 3 sērija | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Skoda Superb might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Skoda Superb 2002 1.9 engine: A reliable engine when using quality oils. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.80 m | 4.78 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.47 m | 1.44 m | |
| Skoda Superb is 2 cm longer than the BMW 5 series, 4 cm narrower, while the height of Skoda Superb is 3 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 460 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.8 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Skoda Superb is 0.8 metres more than that of the BMW 5 series, which means Skoda Superb can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`600 | 2`000 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | average | |
| Skoda Superb has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for BMW 5 series, so Skoda Superb quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 1800 | 2800 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 9.0/10 | 8.5/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Skoda Superb has
|
BMW 5 sērija has
| |