Volkswagen Vento 1992 vs BMW 3 series 1991
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.8 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: | 90 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 145 NM | 190 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.7 seconds | 9.9 seconds | |
|
BMW 3 series is a more dynamic driving. Volkswagen Vento engine produces 60 HP less power than BMW 3 series, whereas torque is 45 NM less than BMW 3 series. Due to the lower power, Volkswagen Vento reaches 100 km/h speed 2.8 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.0 | 9.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.7 l/100km | 9.3 l/100km | |
|
The Volkswagen Vento is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volkswagen Vento consumes 1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the BMW 3 series, which means that by driving the Volkswagen Vento over 15,000 km in a year you can save 150 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volkswagen Vento consumes 1.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than the BMW 3 series. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 65 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 680 km in combined cycle | 720 km in combined cycle | |
| 880 km on highway | 970 km on highway | ||
| 710 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 (Volkswagen Vento) 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 | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 420'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 8 years | 7 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Volkswagen Golf, Seat Toledo, Seat Ibiza, Seat Cordoba | 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. Volkswagen Vento might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.38 m | 4.43 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.39 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Volkswagen Vento is 5 cm shorter than the BMW 3 series, width is practically the same , while the height of Volkswagen Vento is 3 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 435 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1200 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.7 meters | 10 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volkswagen Vento is 0.7 metres more than that of the BMW 3 series, which means Volkswagen Vento can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`200 | 1`760 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | low | |
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 2600 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 6.3/10 | 7.2/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volkswagen Vento has
|
BMW 3 sērija has
| |