Volvo 850 1993 vs BMW 3 series 2001
| Body: | Estate car / wagon | Hatchback | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
| Engine: | 2.4 Petrol | 2.5 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 140 HP | 192 HP | |
| Torque: | 206 NM | 245 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11 seconds | 8.2 seconds | |
|
BMW 3 series is a more dynamic driving. Volvo 850 engine produces 52 HP less power than BMW 3 series, whereas torque is 39 NM less than BMW 3 series. Due to the lower power, Volvo 850 reaches 100 km/h speed 2.8 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.3 | 9.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.2 l/100km | 10.4 l/100km | |
|
The Volvo 850 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volvo 850 consumes 0.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the BMW 3 series, which means that by driving the Volvo 850 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 30 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volvo 850 consumes 1.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the BMW 3 series. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 73 litres | 63 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 780 km in combined cycle | 660 km in combined cycle | |
| 790 km with real consumption | 600 km with real consumption | ||
| Volvo 850 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| 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 (Volvo 850) 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: | 4.71 m | 4.26 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.75 m | |
| Height: | 1.43 m | 1.41 m | |
|
Volvo 850 is larger. Volvo 850 is 45 cm longer than the BMW 3 series, 1 cm wider, while the height of Volvo 850 is 2 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 310 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1100 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.2 meters | 10 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volvo 850 is 0.2 metres more than that of the BMW 3 series. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`600 | 1`930 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | BMW 3 series has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Volvo 850 has serious deffects in 260 percent more cases than BMW 3 series, so BMW 3 series quality is probably significantly better | ||
| Average price (€): | 800 | 2600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo 850 has
|
BMW 3 sērija has
| |