Audi A3 2013 vs BMW 2 series 2013
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.8 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 180 HP | 184 HP | |
| Torque: | 250 NM | 270 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7.8 seconds | 7.6 seconds | |
|
BMW 2 series is a more dynamic driving. Audi A3 engine produces 4 HP less power than BMW 2 series, whereas torque is 20 NM less than BMW 2 series. Due to the lower power, Audi A3 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.8 | 6.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.3 l/100km | 7.9 l/100km | |
|
The BMW 2 series is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Audi A3 consumes 0.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the BMW 2 series, which means that by driving the Audi A3 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 60 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Audi A3 consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the BMW 2 series. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 50 litres | 52 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 860 km in combined cycle | 830 km in combined cycle | |
| 1040 km on highway | 1040 km on highway | ||
| 600 km with real consumption | 650 km with real consumption | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Audi A3) 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 2 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. | |||
| BMW 2 sērija 2013 2.0 engine: Until 2015, engines used to have problems with the timing chain guides, which have been resolved over time. Other problems with this engine are the oil pump performance and its drive chain, as well as cracking ... More about BMW 2 sērija 2013 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.42 m | 4.43 m | |
| Width: | 1.79 m | 1.77 m | |
| Height: | 1.41 m | 1.42 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Audi A3 is 1 cm shorter than the BMW 2 series, 2 cm wider the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 320 litres | 280 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
678 litres | no data | |
|
Audi A3 has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, Audi A3 has 40 litres more trunk space than the BMW 2 series. The BMW 2 series may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.9 meters | 10.9 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`930 | 2`000 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | above average | low | |
| Audi A3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data BMW 2 series has serious deffects in 120 percent more cases than Audi A3, so Audi A3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | no data | 19 400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Audi A3 has
|
| |