i3 120 Ah vs E300 3.0L Comparison
Car Information
Engine / Motor
160 km/h
260 km/h
/
4
/
2998 cc
/
GCC
Dimensions
4 Seater
5 Seater
4011 mm
4949 mm
1775 mm
1880 mm
1598 mm
1480 mm
2570 mm
2961 mm
260 L
540 L
/
4 Doors
Fuel Economy
/
9 Km/L
/
66 L
/
9 Km/L
Comfort
✓
/
✓
/
/
✓
Interior
/
✓
/
Digital
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
Safety
✓
/
Infotainment
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
Transmission
/
Automatic
Chassis & Steering
Rear Wheel Drive
All Wheel Drive
Key Spec
TBD
/
184 BHP
204 BHP - 402
Automatic
7-speed Automatic (7G-TRONIC Plus) & 9-speed automatic & Automatic
Electric
Petrol & Diesel & Gasoline & Hybrid & Petrol
TBD
/
4 Seater
4 Seater - 5 Seater
/
2.0 L - 3.0 L
/
TBD
Engine
Electric
Gasoline
184 BHP
285 BHP
270 Nm
420 Nm
/
In-Line
/
3.0 L
/
Single Turbo
/
4
Exterior
/
✓
Comparison of configuration highlights
i3 120 Ah
- Parking sensor rear
- Parking sensor front
- ABS
E300 3.0L
- Remote key types
Review Comparison
Positive
- No data found
Negative
- No data found
Positive
- No data found
Negative
- No data found
Related comparisons
Editor's Picki3 120 Ah
Expert / Editor Recommendation
Choose i3 120 Ah if you care more about price; choose E300 3.0L if you care more about interior space.
Popular Car Comparisons
Q&A
- According to fuel consumption data, i3 120 Ah has a fuel consumption of No data, while E300 3.0L has a fuel consumption of 11.11. Therefore, No data is more fuel-efficient.
- In terms of interior space, i3 120 Ah has a wheelbase of 2570 mm, while E300 3.0L has a wheelbase of 2961 mm. Generally, the model with the longer wheelbase, E300 3.0L, offers more room.
- Check drive type, ground clearance and torque together. i3 120 Ah uses Rear Wheel Drive, while E300 3.0L uses All Wheel Drive.