Alfa Romeo 156 1997 vs BMW 3 series 1995
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.5 Petrol | 2.5 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 190 HP | 170 HP | |
| Torque: | 222 NM | 245 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7.3 seconds | 8 seconds | |
|
Alfa Romeo 156 is more dynamic to drive. Alfa Romeo 156 engine produces 20 HP more power than BMW 3 series, but torque is 23 NM less than BMW 3 series. Thanks to more power Alfa Romeo 156 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.7 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 11.4 | 9.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 11.2 l/100km | 9.3 l/100km | |
|
The BMW 3 series is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Alfa Romeo 156 consumes 2.4 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 360 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Alfa Romeo 156 consumes 1.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the BMW 3 series. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 63 litres | 65 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 550 km in combined cycle | 720 km in combined cycle | |
| 750 km on highway | 970 km on highway | ||
| 560 km with real consumption | 690 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 (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. | |||
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 | |
|
BMW 3 series has more luggage space. Alfa Romeo 156 has 55 litres less trunk space than the BMW 3 series. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.6 meters | 10 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Alfa Romeo 156 is 1.6 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`850 | 1`770 | |
| 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
| |