Volkswagen EOS 2006 vs BMW 3 series 2010
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 140 HP | 184 HP | |
| Torque: | 320 NM | 380 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.4 seconds | 8.4 seconds | |
|
BMW 3 series is a more dynamic driving. Volkswagen EOS engine produces 44 HP less power than BMW 3 series, whereas torque is 60 NM less than BMW 3 series. Due to the lower power, Volkswagen EOS reaches 100 km/h speed 2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.1 | 5.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.2 l/100km | 6.4 l/100km | |
|
By specification Volkswagen EOS consumes 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the BMW 3 series, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Volkswagen EOS could require 75 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Volkswagen EOS consumes 0.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the BMW 3 series. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 61 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 900 km in combined cycle | 1080 km in combined cycle | |
| 1100 km on highway | 1290 km on highway | ||
| 880 km with real consumption | 950 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) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Volkswagen EOS) 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. | |||
| Ground clearance: | 106 mm (4.2 inches) | 138 mm (5.4 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, BMW 3 series can perform better on bad roads - it can go over higher obstacles and bumps. At the same time, the higher ground clearance can reduce stability and handling on paved roads, especially at higher speeds. Note, however, that this BMW 3 series version does not have 4x4 drive, which is very important in poor road conditions. | |||
| BMW 3 sērija 2010 2.0 engine: Because of problems with the timing chain, which tends to stretch at 100,000 km, the BMW N47 engine is sometimes called the worst BMW engine. Replacing the timing chain also requires removing the engine from ... More about BMW 3 sērija 2010 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.41 m | 4.61 m | |
| Width: | 1.79 m | 1.78 m | |
| Height: | 1.44 m | 1.38 m | |
| Volkswagen EOS is 20 cm shorter than the BMW 3 series, width is practically the same , while the height of Volkswagen EOS is 6 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 205 litres | 210 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
380 litres | 350 litres | |
| Volkswagen EOS has 5 litres less trunk space than the BMW 3 series. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Volkswagen EOS (by 30 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.9 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volkswagen EOS is 0.1 metres less than that of the BMW 3 series. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`010 | 2`100 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | average | |
| Volkswagen EOS has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data BMW 3 series has serious deffects in 15 percent more cases than Volkswagen EOS, so Volkswagen EOS quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 5000 | 13 200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volkswagen EOS has
|
BMW 3 sērija has
| |