Audi A3 2004 vs Kia Ceed 2007
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.4 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: | 102 HP | 109 HP | |
| Torque: | 148 NM | 140 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.2 seconds | 11.6 seconds | |
|
Kia Ceed is a more dynamic driving. Audi A3 engine produces 7 HP less power than Kia Ceed, but torque is 8 NM more than Kia Ceed. Due to the lower power, Audi A3 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.6 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.1 | 6.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.7 l/100km | 7.4 l/100km | |
|
The Kia Ceed is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Audi A3 consumes 1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Kia Ceed, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Audi A3 could require 150 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Audi A3 consumes 0.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Kia Ceed. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 53 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 770 km in combined cycle | 860 km in combined cycle | |
| 1010 km on highway | 1010 km on highway | ||
| 710 km with real consumption | 710 km with real consumption | ||
| Kia Ceed gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 460'000 km | 300'000 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 Audi A3 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 10 years | 19 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Volkswagen Passat, Audi A4, Seat Exeo | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Hyundai i30, Hyundai Accent, Hyundai i20, Kia RIO | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Kia Ceed might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Audi A3 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. | |||
| Kia Ceed 2007 1.4 engine: This engine is generally reliable and rarely causes issues.
One of its major concerns is cylinder wall scoring. Early versions were equipped with a large exhaust manifold, but around 2010, it was replaced with a compact catalytic manifold. If the catalytic ... More about Kia Ceed 2007 1.4 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.29 m | 4.25 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.79 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.45 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Audi A3 is 4 cm longer than the Kia Ceed, 3 cm narrower, while the height of Audi A3 is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 370 litres | 340 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1120 litres | no data | |
|
Audi A3 has more luggage capacity. Audi A3 has 30 litres more trunk space than the Kia Ceed. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.7 meters | no data | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`805 | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | high | low | |
| Audi A3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Kia Ceed has serious deffects in 50 percent more cases than Audi A3, so Audi A3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 3200 | 2600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Audi A3 has
|
Kia Ceed has
| |