2001 BMW 320 vs. 2005 Mercury Sable
To start off, 2005 Mercury Sable is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2001 BMW 320. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2001 BMW 320 would be higher. At 2,983 cc (6 cylinders), 2005 Mercury Sable is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2005 Mercury Sable (153 HP) has 5 more horse power than 2001 BMW 320. (148 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2005 Mercury Sable should accelerate faster than 2001 BMW 320. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2005 Mercury Sable weights approximately 43 kg more than 2001 BMW 320. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Let's talk about torque, 2001 BMW 320 (355 Nm) has 103 more torque (in Nm) than 2005 Mercury Sable. (252 Nm). This means 2001 BMW 320 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2005 Mercury Sable.
Compare all specifications:
2001 BMW 320 | 2005 Mercury Sable | |
Make | BMW | Mercury |
Model | 320 | Sable |
Year Released | 2001 | 2005 |
Body Type | Hatchback | Sedan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1995 cc | 2983 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
Horse Power | 148 HP | 153 HP |
Torque | 355 Nm | 252 Nm |
Engine Compression Ratio | 17.0:1 | 9.7:1 |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 6 seats |
Number of Doors | 3 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1470 kg | 1513 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4270 mm | 5080 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1760 mm | 1860 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1410 mm | 1420 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2730 mm | 2760 mm |
Fuel Consumption | 4.4 L/100km | 8.7 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 7.6 L/100km | 11.8 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 5.5 L/100km | 10.2 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 63 L | 68 L |