Toyota Celica 1990 vs BMW 3 series 1992
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 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: | 156 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 186 NM | 190 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.4 seconds | 9.9 seconds | |
|
Toyota Celica is more dynamic to drive. Toyota Celica engine produces 6 HP more power than BMW 3 series, but torque is 4 NM less than BMW 3 series. Thanks to more power Toyota Celica reaches 100 km/h speed 1.5 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.8 | 9.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 10.0 l/100km | 9.3 l/100km | |
|
By specification Toyota Celica consumes 1.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the BMW 3 series, which means that by driving the Toyota Celica over 15,000 km in a year you can save 180 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Toyota Celica consumes 0.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the BMW 3 series. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 65 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 760 km in combined cycle | 720 km in combined cycle | |
| 1030 km on highway | 970 km on highway | ||
| 600 km with real consumption | 690 km with real consumption | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Toyota Celica) 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 3 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 | |||
| Engine production duration: | 21 years | 7 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Toyota Carina E | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including BMW 5 sērija, BMW Z3 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The BMW 3 series engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.42 m | 4.43 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.71 m | |
| Height: | 1.30 m | 1.37 m | |
|
Toyota Celica is smaller. Toyota Celica is 1 cm shorter than the BMW 3 series, 1 cm narrower, while the height of Toyota Celica is 7 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 320 litres | 435 litres | |
|
BMW 3 series has more luggage space. Toyota Celica has 115 litres less trunk space than the BMW 3 series. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 10 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Toyota Celica is 1 metres more than that of the BMW 3 series, which means Toyota Celica can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 1`760 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | low | |
| Average price (€): | 3400 | 3400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Toyota Celica has
|
BMW 3 sērija has
| |