2009 BMW M3 vs. 2005 Toyota RAV4
To start off, 2009 BMW M3 is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2005 Toyota RAV4. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2005 Toyota RAV4 would be higher. At 3,999 cc (8 cylinders), 2009 BMW M3 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 BMW M3 (414 HP @ 8300 RPM) has 253 more horse power than 2005 Toyota RAV4. (161 HP @ 5200 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2009 BMW M3 should accelerate faster than 2005 Toyota RAV4.
Because 2009 BMW M3 is rear wheel drive (RWD), it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, it will be much easier to do with 2009 BMW M3. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2005 Toyota RAV4, being front wheel drive (FWD), will offer much better control with better grip. 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, 2009 BMW M3 (295 Nm) has 71 more torque (in Nm) than 2005 Toyota RAV4. (224 Nm). This means 2009 BMW M3 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2005 Toyota RAV4.
Compare all specifications:
| 2009 BMW M3 | 2005 Toyota RAV4 | |
| Make | BMW | Toyota |
| Model | M3 | RAV4 |
| Year Released | 2009 | 2005 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3999 cc | 2360 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 414 HP | 161 HP |
| Engine RPM | 8300 RPM | 5200 RPM |
| Torque | 295 Nm | 224 Nm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 12.0:1 | 9.6:1 |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Length | 4590 mm | 4240 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1820 mm | 1740 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1680 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2770 mm | 2470 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 11.9 L/100km | 7.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 17 L/100km | 9.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 14.9 L/100km | 9.1 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 63 L | 56 L |
