Car comparison

BMW M3 Convertible (E36) 3.2vsChevrolet Camaro IV · Facelift 1998 Z28 5.7 i V8

Compare specs, acceleration, fuel consumption, dimensions, practicality, and estimated running costs side by side.

New comparison

BMW M3 Convertible (E36)

3.2

321 hp3201 ccGasolineRWDManualNaturally aspiratedCabriolet / convertible1995-1999
VS

Chevrolet Camaro IV · Facelift 1998

Z28 5.7 i V8

310 hp5665 ccGasolineRWDAutomaticNaturally aspiratedCabriolet / convertible2001-2002

Comparison overview

Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.

Best choices

BMW M3 Convertible (E36) 3.2

  • Quickest 0-100 km/h
    5.6 s
  • Fastest top speed
    260 km/h
    162 mph Unrestricted
    250 km/h
    155 mph Restricted
  • Most powerful
    321 hp
    239 kW
  • Lightest
    1,560 kg
    3,439 lb
  • Best power-to-weight
    206 hp/t
    153 kW/t
    4.9 kg/hp
  • Lowest combined fuel consumption
    11.1 L/100 km
    21.2 mpg US
    25.4 mpg UK
  • Lowest highway consumption
    7.7 L/100 km
    30.5 mpg US
    36.7 mpg UK
  • Best estimated range
    559 km
    347 mi
  • Largest trunk
    230 L
  • Best economy score
    77/100
  • Best practicality score
    42/100

Specification comparison

Specification comparison
ModelBMWM3 Convertible (E36)3.2ChevroletCamaro IVFacelift 1998Z28 5.7 i V8
Power
321hp239kW
310hp231kW
Torque
350Nm258lb-ft
461Nm340lb-ft
Curb weight
1,560kg3,439lb
1,605kg3,538lb
Gross weight
1,980kg4,365lb
1,930kg4,255lb
Top speed
Unrestricted
260 km/h162 mph
Restricted
250 km/h155 mph
Calculated
257 km/h
160 mph
To 99% top speed
75.4s99% target: 257 km/h / 160 mph
Calculated
86.8s99% target: 254 km/h / 158 mph
Calculated
0-100 km/h
5.6s
6.0s
0-200 km/h
20.1s
Calculated
22.8s
Calculated
0-60 mph
5.3s
Calculated
5.7s
Calculated
Fuel consumption
11.1L/100 km21.2mpg US25.4mpg UK
12.4L/100 km19mpg US22.8mpg UK
Fuel consumption city
17L/100 km13.8mpg US16.6mpg UK
14.7L/100 km16mpg US19.2mpg UK
Fuel consumption highway
7.7L/100 km30.5mpg US36.7mpg UK
10.2L/100 km23.1mpg US27.7mpg UK
Quarter mile
13.7s
Calculated
14.1s
Calculated
Power-to-weight
206hp/t153kW/t93hp/1000 lb
Calculated
193hp/t144kW/t88hp/1000 lb
Calculated
Torque-to-weight
224Nm/t150lb-ft/ton
Calculated
287Nm/t192lb-ft/ton
Calculated
Estimated range
559km347mi
Calculated
512km318mi
Calculated
Displacement
3,201cc195cu in
5,665cc346cu in
Length
4,433mm175in
4,914mm193in
Width
1,710mm67in
1,882mm74in
Height
1,340mm53in
1,315mm52in
Wheelbase
2,700mm106in
2,568mm101in
Front track
1,422mm56in
1,542mm61in
Rear track
1,444mm57in
1,540mm61in
Trunk volume
230L
215L
Max trunk volume-
930L
Doors
2
2
Seats
4
4
Fuel tank
62L
64L
CO2 emissions-
293g/km

Performance charts

Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.

Dyno simulation

Estimated stock-style power and torque curves by engine speed.

BMW M3 Convertible (E36) 3.2Chevrolet Camaro IV Facelift 1998 Z28 5.7 i V8PowerTorque
  • BMW M3 Convertible (E36) 3.2: Power / Torque
  • Chevrolet Camaro IV Facelift 1998 Z28 5.7 i V8: Power / Torque
Dyno simulation data table
VehiclePeak power RPMPeak torque RPMMax engine speed
BMWM3 Convertible (E36)3.27,400 rpm3,250 rpm7,650 rpm
ChevroletCamaro IVFacelift 1998Z28 5.7 i V85,200 rpm4,000 rpm5,450 rpm

Acceleration curve

Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.

Acceleration and drag-race table
MetricBMWM3 Convertible (E36)3.2ChevroletCamaro IVFacelift 1998Z28 5.7 i V8
Acceleration checkpoints
0-60 mph
0-97 km/h
5.3 s
5.7 s
0-100 km/h
0-62 mph
5.6 s
6.0 s
0-200 km/h
0-124 mph
20.1 s
22.8 s
Top speed
Unrestricted
260 km/h162 mph
Restricted
250 km/h155 mph
Likely limited
257 km/h
160 mph
Drag race simulation
60 ft
18 m
2.3 s
2.3 s
330 ft
101 m
6.0 s
6.1 s
1/8 mile
201 m
9.0 s
9.2 s
1000 ft
305 m
11.6 s
11.9 s
1/4 mile
402 m
13.7 s
14.1 s
Trap speed
1/4 mile
402 m
169 km/h
105 mph
163 km/h
101 mph

Power comparison

Bar comparison chart for Power. Higher is better · hp / kW

Chart data table
VehicleValue
BMWM3 Convertible (E36)3.2
321 hp
239 kW
ChevroletCamaro IVFacelift 1998Z28 5.7 i V8
310 hp
231 kW

BMW M3 Convertible (E36) 3.2 has 11 hp more than Chevrolet Camaro IV Facelift 1998 Z28 5.7 i V8.

The biggest power difference is between Chevrolet Camaro IV Facelift 1998 Z28 5.7 i V8 and BMW M3 Convertible (E36) 3.2: 11 hp (8 kW).

Torque comparison

Bar comparison chart for Torque. Higher is better · Nm / lb-ft

Chart data table
VehicleValue
BMWM3 Convertible (E36)3.2
350 Nm
258 lb-ft
ChevroletCamaro IVFacelift 1998Z28 5.7 i V8
461 Nm
340 lb-ft

Curb weight comparison

Bar comparison chart for Curb weight. Lower is better · kg / lb

Chart data table
VehicleValue
BMWM3 Convertible (E36)3.2
1,560 kg
3,439 lb
ChevroletCamaro IVFacelift 1998Z28 5.7 i V8
1,605 kg
3,538 lb

Top speed without limiter comparison

Bar comparison chart for Top speed without limiter. Higher is better · km/h / mph

Chart data table
VehicleValue
BMWM3 Convertible (E36)3.2
Unrestricted
260 km/h162 mph
Restricted
250 km/h155 mph
ChevroletCamaro IVFacelift 1998Z28 5.7 i V8
257 km/h
160 mph

0-100 km/h comparison

Bar comparison chart for 0-100 km/h. Lower is better · seconds

Chart data table
VehicleValue
BMWM3 Convertible (E36)3.25.6 s
ChevroletCamaro IVFacelift 1998Z28 5.7 i V86.0 s

The biggest 0-100 km/h difference is between BMW M3 Convertible (E36) 3.2 and Chevrolet Camaro IV Facelift 1998 Z28 5.7 i V8: 0.4 s.

Fuel consumption comparison

Bar comparison chart for Fuel consumption. Lower is better · L/100 km / mpg US / mpg UK

Chart data table
VehicleValue
BMWM3 Convertible (E36)3.2
11.1 L/100 km
21.2 mpg US
25.4 mpg UK
ChevroletCamaro IVFacelift 1998Z28 5.7 i V8
12.4 L/100 km
19.0 mpg US
22.8 mpg UK

The biggest fuel consumption difference is between BMW M3 Convertible (E36) 3.2 and Chevrolet Camaro IV Facelift 1998 Z28 5.7 i V8: 1.3 L/100 km.

Power-to-weight comparison

Bar comparison chart for Power-to-weight. Higher is better · hp/t / kW/t

Chart data table
VehicleValue
BMWM3 Convertible (E36)3.2
206 hp/t
153 kW/t
4.9 kg/hp
ChevroletCamaro IVFacelift 1998Z28 5.7 i V8
193 hp/t
144 kW/t
5.2 kg/hp

Estimated range comparison

Bar comparison chart for Estimated range. Higher is better · km / mi

Chart data table
VehicleValue
BMWM3 Convertible (E36)3.2
559 km
347 mi
ChevroletCamaro IVFacelift 1998Z28 5.7 i V8
512 km
318 mi

Performance spider chart

Radar chart comparing normalized performance and fuel-consumption scores.

Chart data table
VehiclePowerAccelerationTop speed
BMWM3 Convertible (E36)3.2
321 hp
239 kW
5.6 s
Unrestricted
260 km/h162 mph
Restricted
250 km/h155 mph
ChevroletCamaro IVFacelift 1998Z28 5.7 i V8
310 hp
231 kW
6.0 s
257 km/h
160 mph

Most attractive quadrant

Scatter chart with performance score on the X axis and practicality score on the Y axis.

Chart data table
VehiclePerformance scorePracticality score
BMWM3 Convertible (E36)3.2
Power
321 hp
239 kW
0-100 km/h5.6 s
Top speed
Unrestricted
260 km/h162 mph
Restricted
250 km/h155 mph
Doors/seats
2 doors
4 seats
Trunk
230 L
8.1 cu ft
Length
4,433 mm
174.5 in
Height
1,340 mm
52.8 in
ChevroletCamaro IVFacelift 1998Z28 5.7 i V8
Power
310 hp
231 kW
0-100 km/h6.0 s
Top speed
257 km/h
160 mph
Doors/seats
2 doors
4 seats
Trunk
215 L
7.6 cu ft
Length
4,914 mm
193.5 in
Height
1,315 mm
51.8 in

Performance vs fuel economy

Cars closer to the top-right corner combine stronger performance with better fuel economy scores.

Performance vs fuel economy data table
VehiclePerformance scoreFuel economy score
BMWM3 Convertible (E36)3.2
Power
321 hp
239 kW
0-100 km/h5.6 s
Top speed
Unrestricted
260 km/h162 mph
Restricted
250 km/h155 mph
11.1 L/100 km
21.2 mpg US
25.4 mpg UK
ChevroletCamaro IVFacelift 1998Z28 5.7 i V8
Power
310 hp
231 kW
0-100 km/h6.0 s
Top speed
257 km/h
160 mph
12.4 L/100 km
19.0 mpg US
22.8 mpg UK

BMW M3 Convertible (E36) 3.2 is closest to the top-right balance target for performance and fuel economy.

Acceleration vs fuel consumption

Cars closer to the lower-left corner offer a better mix of quick acceleration and low fuel consumption.

Acceleration vs fuel consumption data table
VehicleFuel consumption, L/100 km0-100 km/h, s
BMWM3 Convertible (E36)3.2
11.1 L/100 km
21.2 mpg US
25.4 mpg UK
5.6 s
ChevroletCamaro IVFacelift 1998Z28 5.7 i V8
12.4 L/100 km
19.0 mpg US
22.8 mpg UK
6.0 s

Power-to-weight vs fuel consumption

The shaded area favors higher power-to-weight with lower combined fuel consumption.

Power-to-weight vs fuel consumption data table
VehiclePower-to-weight, hp/tFuel consumption, L/100 km
BMWM3 Convertible (E36)3.2
206 hp/t
153 kW/t
4.9 kg/hp
11.1 L/100 km
21.2 mpg US
25.4 mpg UK
ChevroletCamaro IVFacelift 1998Z28 5.7 i V8
193 hp/t
144 kW/t
5.2 kg/hp
12.4 L/100 km
19.0 mpg US
22.8 mpg UK

Detailed score breakdown

Detailed score breakdown
VehicleBMWM3 Convertible (E36)3.2ChevroletCamaro IVFacelift 1998Z28 5.7 i V8
Power
321 hp
239 kW
310 hp
231 kW
Torque
350 Nm
258 lb-ft
461 Nm
340 lb-ft
Acceleration
5.6 s
6.0 s
Top speed
Unrestricted
260 km/h162 mph
Restricted
250 km/h155 mph
257 km/h
160 mph
Lightness
1,560 kg
3,439 lb
1,605 kg
3,538 lb
Fuel consumption
11.1 L/100 km
21.2 mpg US
25.4 mpg UK
12.4 L/100 km
19.0 mpg US
22.8 mpg UK
Practicality
Doors/seats
2 doors
4 seats
Trunk
230 L
8.1 cu ft
Length
4,433 mm
174.5 in
Height
1,340 mm
52.8 in
Doors/seats
2 doors
4 seats
Trunk
215 L
7.6 cu ft
Length
4,914 mm
193.5 in
Height
1,315 mm
51.8 in
Range score
559 km
347 mi
512 km
318 mi
CO2 score
-
293 g/km
Trunk score
230 L
8.1 cu ft
215 L
7.6 cu ft
Power-to-weight score
206 hp/t
153 kW/t
4.9 kg/hp
193 hp/t
144 kW/t
5.2 kg/hp
Overall
Fixed score
Fixed score

Fuel cost and annual usage

Estimate running costs from combined consumption, your annual distance, and the fuel price in your local currency.

Enter the fuel price in your local currency, for example €/L, $/gal, £/L or any other local currency.

LC = Local Currency

Fuel cost and annual usage
VehicleBMW M3 Convertible (E36) 3.2Chevrolet Camaro IV Facelift 1998 Z28 5.7 i V8
Consumption11.1 L/100 km21.2 mpg US25.4 mpg UK12.4 L/100 km19 mpg US22.8 mpg UK
Cost / 100 km19.43 LC100 km21.70 LC100 km
Cost / 100 mi31.26 LC100 mi34.92 LC100 mi
Annual fuel used1,665 L440 US gal366 UK gal1,860 L491 US gal409 UK gal
Annual fuel cost2,914 LC/year3,255 LC/year

Head-to-head comparisons

BMW M3 Convertible (E36) 3.2

  • Has 11 hp more
  • Is 45 kg lighter
  • Is 0.4 s quicker from 0-100 km/h
  • Has 3 km/h (2 mph) higher top speed
  • Uses 1.3 L/100 km less fuel
  • Has 13 hp/t better power-to-weight
  • Has 46 km (29 mi) more estimated range
  • Has 15 L more trunk volume

Pros

  • Quickest 0-100 km/h in this comparison
  • Highest top speed
  • Most powerful
  • Lightest
  • Lowest combined fuel consumption
  • Best power-to-weight ratio
  • Best estimated range
  • Largest trunk

Choose cars to compare

Brand
Model
Generation
Engine or modification
BMW M3 Convertible (E36) 3.2
Chevrolet Camaro IV Z28 5.7 i V8
Compare selected cars
2 vehicles selected

Popular comparisons

3.2
3.2i 24V
VS
BMWM3 Convertible (E36)3.2vsBMWM3 Convertible (E46)3.2i 24V
Z28 5.7 i V8
2.0 T
VS
ChevroletCamaro IVFacelift 1998Z28 5.7 i V8vsChevroletCamaro VIFacelift 20182.0 T
3.2
3.2
VS
BMWM3 Convertible (E36)3.2vsBMWM3 Coupe (E36)3.2
Z28 5.7 i V8
2.0
VS
ChevroletCamaro IVFacelift 1998Z28 5.7 i V8vsChevroletCamaro VI Convertible2.0
3.2
3.2
VS
BMWM3 Convertible (E36)3.2vsBMWM3 (E36)3.2
Z28 5.7 i V8
Z28 5.7 i V8
VS
ChevroletCamaro IVFacelift 1998Z28 5.7 i V8vsChevroletCamaro IVZ28 5.7 i V8
3.2
3.2i 24V
VS
BMWM3 Convertible (E36)3.2vsBMWM3 Coupe (E46)3.2i 24V
Z28 5.7 i V8
2.0
VS
ChevroletCamaro IVFacelift 1998Z28 5.7 i V8vsChevroletCamaro VI2.0
3.2
4.0 V8
VS
BMWM3 Convertible (E36)3.2vsBMWM3 Convertible (E93)4.0 V8
Z28 5.7 i V8
CLK 500
VS
ChevroletCamaro IVFacelift 1998Z28 5.7 i V8vsMercedes-BenzCLK (A209)CLK 500
3.2
2.3
VS
BMWM3 Convertible (E36)3.2vsBMWM3 Convertible (E30)2.3
Z28 5.7 i V8
AMG CLK 55 V8
VS
ChevroletCamaro IVFacelift 1998Z28 5.7 i V8vsMercedes-BenzCLK (A208)Facelift 1999AMG CLK 55 V8
BMW M3 Convertible (E36) 3.2 vs Chevrolet Camaro IV · Facelift 1998 Z28 5.7 i V8 - car comparison - FastVsFaster