Alfa Romeo 156 1997 vs BMW 3 series 1991
| 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: | 155 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 187 NM | 190 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.6 seconds | 9.9 seconds | |
|
Alfa Romeo 156 is more dynamic to drive. Alfa Romeo 156 engine produces 5 HP more power than BMW 3 series, but torque is 3 NM less than BMW 3 series. Thanks to more power Alfa Romeo 156 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.3 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.5 | 9.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.2 l/100km | 9.3 l/100km | |
|
The Alfa Romeo 156 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Alfa Romeo 156 consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the BMW 3 series, which means that by driving the Alfa Romeo 156 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 75 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Alfa Romeo 156 consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the BMW 3 series. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 63 litres | 65 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 740 km in combined cycle | 720 km in combined cycle | |
| 950 km on highway | 970 km on highway | ||
| 680 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 (Alfa Romeo 156) 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: | 290'000 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 BMW 3 series engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 3 years | 7 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Alfa Romeo 166, Alfa Romeo 145, Alfa Romeo Spider | 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.43 m | 4.43 m | |
| Width: | 1.74 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.39 m | |
| Alfa Romeo 156 and BMW 3 series are practically the same length. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 380 litres | 435 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1200 litres | |
|
BMW 3 series has more luggage space. Alfa Romeo 156 has 55 litres less trunk space than the BMW 3 series. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.1 meters | 10 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Alfa Romeo 156 is 1.1 metres more than that of the BMW 3 series, which means Alfa Romeo 156 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`770 | 1`760 | |
| 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 10 percent more cases than BMW 3 series, so BMW 3 series quality is probably slightly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 2600 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 6.7/10 | 7.2/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Alfa Romeo 156 has
|
BMW 3 sērija has
| |