Compare two cars

Compare any two cars and get our Virtual Adviser™ opinion

Car #1
Make
Model
Variant
Engine
Car #2
Make
Model
Variant
Engine

compare selected cars
1999. - 2001.
D - Large family car
sedan, 4 door
front
Badges
Production
Vehicle class
Body style
Wheel drive
Safety
1998. - 2001.
D - Large family car
sedan, 4 door
rear

Marketing

!function(v,t,o){var a=t.createElement("script");a.src="https://ad.vidverto.io/vidverto/js/aries/v1/invocation.js",a.setAttribute("fetchpriority","high");var r=v.top;r.document.head.appendChild(a),v.self!==v.top&&(v.frameElement.style.cssText="width:0px!important;height:0px!important;"),r.aries=r.aries||{},r.aries.v1=r.aries.v1||{commands:[]};var c=r.aries.v1;c.commands.push((function(){var d=document.getElementById("_vidverto-725dc94bb887f000f0b279c49613751c");d.setAttribute("id",(d.getAttribute("id")+(new Date()).getTime()));var t=v.frameElement||d;c.mount("10285",t,{width:720,height:405})}))}(window,document); */ ?>

Dimensons & Outlines

4478 mm
1733 mm
1415 mm
440 liters
720 liters
62 liters
Length
Width
Height
Boot (min)
Boot (max)
Fuel tank
4471 mm
1739 mm
1415 mm
440 liters
40 liters
63 liters
1999 Audi A4
1998 BMW 3 Series

Engine

Volkswagen
1.6 8v ALZ
Petrol
4 - Inline, 2 valves per cylinder
Nat. Asp.
1595 cc
102 hp
148 Nm
Engine
Fuel
Configuration
Aspiration
Displacement
Power
Torque
Petrol
4 - Inline, 2 valves per cylinder
Nat. Asp.
1895 cc
105 hp
165 Nm

Performance (manual gearbox)

manual gearbox - 5 gears
1175 kg
11.9 s
190 km/h
11.2 l/100km
5.9 l/100km
7.9 l/100km
192 g/km
Gearbox type
Vehicle weight
Acc. 0-100
Top speed
Cons. (urban)
Cons. (highway)
Cons. (average)
CO2 emissions
manual gearbox - 5 gears
1285 kg
12.2 s
200 km/h
11.2 l/100km
5.9 l/100km
7.9 l/100km
188 g/km

Performance (automatic gearbox)

automatic - 4 gears
1200 kg
14.6 s
188 km/h
11.8 l/100km
6.7 l/100km
8.6 l/100km
g/km
Gearbox type
Vehicle weight
Acc. 0-100
Top speed
Cons. (urban)
Cons. (highway)
Cons. (average)
CO2 emissions
automatic - 4 gears
1320 kg
13.6 s
194 km/h
12.8 l/100km
6.7 l/100km
9.0 l/100km
214 g/km

Expenses

1100 EUR
Price from
1100 EUR

Virtual Adviser's™ opinion

Overview

Two significantly similar cars, no doubt about that. Still, each one has something different to offer. Having both cars powered by petrol engines and utilizing the 4-door sedan body style within the same 'Large family car' segment, the only major difference here really is their wheel drive configuration (front for the Audi and rear in the case of the BMW). The first one has a Volkswagen-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 4-cylinder, 8-valves 102hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 8-valves 105hp engine designed by BMW.

Safety

The first thing to look into here would be the results from European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP) tests performed on the two cars. Good thing is that both vehicles got tested, with the BMW being a slightly better choice apparently. Moving further on, let's take a closer look at some additional safety-related facts. Both vehicles belong to the large family car segment, which is generally a good thing safety-wise, but it doesn't do much to help us decide between the two. On the other hand, taking kerb weight as an important factor into account, 3 Series offers a marginal difference of 9% more metal.

Reliability

Reliability is not the best thing to consider on the make level, but it is worth mentioning that both brands display similar results in faults and breakdowns, when all the models are taken into account. These are the official statistics, while our visitors describe reliability of Audi with an average rating of 4.2, and models under the BMW badge with 4.1 out of 5. The same official information place A4 as average reliability-wise, and 3 Series is more or less at the same level.We should definitely mention that owners of cars with the same powertrain as Audi A4 rank it on average as 3.8, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 4.0 out of 5.

Performance & Fuel economy

Audi is a bit more agile, reaching 100km/h in 0.3 seconds less than its competitor. Still, it lacks the power to win the top speed competition, topping at 190 kilometers per hour, 10km/h less than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy things look pretty much the same for both cars, averaging around 7.9 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (36 mpg), in combined cycle.


Verdict

BMW appears just a bit more reliable, although the difference is truly marginal. The most important thing when deciding between any two vehicles should always be safety, both passive and active. In my opinion, everything taken into account, 3 Series offers much better overall protection, which launches it ahead of the other contender. It all continues in the same direction, with BMW offering somewhat better performance, just enough to call it quicker. Fuel consumption is more or less the same. It's not difficult to say then that if I'd need to make a choice, it would definitely be the BMW. Anyway, that's the most objective conclusion I could've came up with and it's based solely on the information found on this website. Aspects such as design, practicality, brand value and driving experience are there for you to measure them out. Also, you could use the oportunity to find out which car, everything taken into account, would be the perfect choice for you in the eyes of the virtual adviser, among thousands of similar, yet so different vehicles.

Check a car by its VIN number

Follow us

AutoManiac Instagram

AutoManiac Facebook

AutoManiac database currently covers:

47worldwide automotive brands
1.613different vehicle models
2.331engines
14.590specific cars