Alfa Romeo 156 2000 vs BMW 3 series 2003
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.4 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: | 140 HP | 115 HP | |
| Torque: | 304 NM | 280 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.8 seconds | 11 seconds | |
|
Alfa Romeo 156 is more dynamic to drive. Alfa Romeo 156 engine produces 25 HP more power than BMW 3 series, whereas torque is 24 NM more than BMW 3 series. Thanks to more power Alfa Romeo 156 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.2 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.8 | 5.8 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.6 l/100km | 6.1 l/100km | |
|
The BMW 3 series is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Alfa Romeo 156 consumes 1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the BMW 3 series, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Alfa Romeo 156 could require 150 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Alfa Romeo 156 consumes 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the BMW 3 series. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 63 litres | 63 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 920 km in combined cycle | 1080 km in combined cycle | |
| 1120 km on highway | 1340 km on highway | ||
| 950 km with real consumption | 1030 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) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 560'000 km | 420'000 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 Alfa Romeo 156 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 2 years | 9 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including BMW 1 sērija, BMW X3 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. BMW 3 series might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| 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. | |||
| Alfa Romeo 156 2000 2.4 engine: A simple and reliable engine, majority of problems are caused by fuel pump, electrical system and the oil pump drive chain. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.43 m | 4.48 m | |
| Width: | 1.74 m | 1.74 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.41 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Alfa Romeo 156 is 5 cm shorter than the BMW 3 series, width is practically the same , while the height of Alfa Romeo 156 is 1 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 360 litres | 435 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1180 litres | 1345 litres | |
|
BMW 3 series has more luggage space. Alfa Romeo 156 has 75 litres less trunk space than the BMW 3 series. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in BMW 3 series (by 165 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.6 meters | no data | |
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 2`005 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | low | below average | |
| BMW 3 series has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Alfa Romeo 156 has serious deffects in 15 percent more cases than BMW 3 series, so BMW 3 series quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1200 | 2400 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 6.6/10 | 7.9/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Alfa Romeo 156 has
|
BMW 3 sērija has
| |