1998 BMW 316 vs. 2000 Ford Artic
To start off, 2000 Ford Artic is newer by 2 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1998 BMW 316. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1998 BMW 316 would be higher. At 3,998 cc (6 cylinders), 2000 Ford Artic is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2000 Ford Artic (128 HP @ 6250 RPM) has 25 more horse power than 1998 BMW 316. (103 HP @ 5300 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2000 Ford Artic should accelerate faster than 1998 BMW 316. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1998 BMW 316 weights approximately 100 kg more than 2000 Ford Artic.
Both vehicles are rear wheel drive (RWD) - it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, both vehicles do the job better than front wheel drive vehicles. With that said, do keep in mind that many other factors such as speed and the wear on your tires can also have significant impact on traction and control. Let's talk about torque, 2000 Ford Artic (325 Nm) has 160 more torque (in Nm) than 1998 BMW 316. (165 Nm). This means 2000 Ford Artic will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1998 BMW 316.
Compare all specifications:
1998 BMW 316 | 2000 Ford Artic | |
Make | BMW | Ford |
Model | 316 | Artic |
Year Released | 1998 | 2000 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1895 cc | 3998 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Horse Power | 103 HP | 128 HP |
Engine RPM | 5300 RPM | 6250 RPM |
Torque | 165 Nm | 325 Nm |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Vehicle Weight | 1398 kg | 1298 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4480 mm | 5240 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1750 mm | 1830 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1420 mm | 1790 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2730 mm | 3200 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 63 L | 68 L |