Chrysler PT Cruiser 2002 vs BMW 3 series 2001
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.1 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 121 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 300 NM | 330 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.1 seconds | 8.9 seconds | |
|
BMW 3 series is a more dynamic driving. Chrysler PT Cruiser engine produces 29 HP less power than BMW 3 series, whereas torque is 30 NM less than BMW 3 series. Due to the lower power, Chrysler PT Cruiser reaches 100 km/h speed 3.2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.9 | 5.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.5 l/100km | 6.5 l/100km | |
|
The BMW 3 series is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Chrysler PT Cruiser consumes 1.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the BMW 3 series, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Chrysler PT Cruiser could require 210 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Chrysler PT Cruiser consumes 1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the BMW 3 series. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 57 litres | 63 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 820 km in combined cycle | 1140 km in combined cycle | |
| 1010 km on highway | 1430 km on highway | ||
| 760 km with real consumption | 960 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 (Chrysler PT Cruiser) 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: | 380'000 km | 420'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 7 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.39 m | 4.26 m | |
| Width: | 1.71 m | 1.75 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.41 m | |
| Chrysler PT Cruiser is 13 cm longer than the BMW 3 series, 4 cm narrower, while the height of Chrysler PT Cruiser is 1 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 310 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1100 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.1 meters | 10 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Chrysler PT Cruiser is 1.1 metres more than that of the BMW 3 series, which means Chrysler PT Cruiser can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`000 | 1`895 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | low | below average | |
| BMW 3 series has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Chrysler PT Cruiser has serious deffects in 25 percent more cases than BMW 3 series, so BMW 3 series quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1200 | 2200 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.3/10 | 7.9/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Chrysler PT Cruiser has
|
BMW 3 sērija has
| |