BMW X1 vs Audi Q3 vs Mercedes-Benz GLA: here's our winner

It’s telling that all three manufacturers made their reputations with high-performance models and luxury cars, yet the demand for compact SUV-Crossovers was such that not even these prestigious manufacturers could resist the allure of this highly profitable market segment. In the beginning, the BMW X1 stood out as the driver’s choice, by virtue of its rear-wheel drive origins, but by the time the second generation arrived in 2016, the X1 had also moved over to a front-wheel drive-derived platform, just like the other two used from the outset.

Now, after an 8-year production run for its first generation, there’s an all-new Audi Q3 to step into the ring. Still based upon a Golf platform, the latest Q3 uses the same MQB component set as you’d find underneath an Audi A3, albeit updated with the latest electronic interfaces and clad in a very familiar-looking body. Conversely, it’s just about time for a new GLA as well, so it will be interesting to see how well the latest Q3 compares with the current X1, and if the GLA’s star has dimmed since it first arrived 5 years ago.

For the sake of this comparison, we’ve selected the least-expensive petrol-fuelled variants with an automatic transmission from each model range. This means that they’re all front-wheel drive, and they all feature 7-speed dual-clutch automatics. Interestingly, the BMW X1 and  offer 6-speed manual gearboxes in their entry-level derivatives, while the Audi can only be had with the 7-speed S-Tronic. At launch, the Q3 is only available with one engine, but fortunately, both the Mercedes and BMW offer comparable entry-level engines to equalise matters. Larger engines for the Q3 will arrive at a later stage.

 

Facts and Figures

	BMW X1 sDrive 18i Auto	Audi Q3 35TFSI	Mercedes-Benz GLA200 Auto
Engine size (cyl/size/fuel)	3-cyl, 1.5-litre turbopetrol	4-cyl, 1.5-litre turbopetrol	4-cyl, 1.6-litre petrol
Power/Torque	103 kW/220 Nm	110 kW/250 Nm	115 kW/250 Nm
Kerb Weight	1505 kg	1570 kg	1435 kg
Length (mm)	4 439	4 484	4 417
Boot volume (litres)*	505	550	481
Airbag count	6	6	7 (opt 9)
Top Speed (km/h) **	201	204	215
Ave Consumption **	6.4 ℓ/100 km	5.8 ℓ/100 km	5.8 ℓ/100 km
Warranty	2 yr/Unlimited km	1 yr/Unlimited km	2 yr/Unlimited km
Price	R 540 045	R 565 000	R 553 197

*With 5 seats in use.

**Manufacturer's official figures.

 

Analysis

Even a cursory glance reveals that these contenders are aimed at the same buyers, with near-identical dimensions and similar performance on offer from all three. This extends to practical considerations as well, while they’re all about on par as far as their available technology goes as well.

 

Power, performance, and drivetrains 

All three manufacturers subscribe to the downsizing philosophy, with small(ish), turbocharged petrol engines providing their motive power. However, the BMW is the odd one out here: even though its engine has the same displacement (1.5 litres) as the Audi’s, it’s a 3-cylinder unit instead of the 4-cylinders in the other two. 

But, while it’s similarly-sized to the others, the X1 is also a little bit down on power by comparison. There’s 103 kW and 220 Nm on offer, compared to the 110 kW and 250 Nm in the Q3, while the GLA's 1.6-litre engine ups the power output to 115 kW (but matches the Q3’s torque output). Even though the X1 is lighter than the Q3, that weight difference isn't enough to improve its power-to-weight ratio compared to the Audi - a problem that's compounded by its noticeable torque deficit.

Adding the GLA’s extra power to its significantly lower kerb weight (70 kg lighter than the X1 and a whopping 135 kg lighter than the Q3), and it stands to reason that the GLA200 has a decisive performance advantage over its opponents, both on acceleration and on top speed. This round goes to the Mercedes-Benz, then, followed by the Audi Q3, with the BMW ending up in a distant third place.

 

Economy

Interestingly, Audi and Mercedes-Benz claim identical average fuel consumption of 5.8 ℓ/100 km, while BMW claims 6.4 ℓ/100 km for their 3-cylindered contender. In reality, they should all return mid-to-high 6 ℓ/100 km figures in normal driving, which is far from unreasonable. 

You could however expect the GLA200 to return lower open-road figures, simply because it’s a fair bit lighter and smaller than the other two, the latter of which will lead to less aerodynamic drag. In this respect, it’s understandable that the X1 should be the thirstiest of this trio, because it’s the tallest of them all. Consequently, this department hands another win to the Mercedes-Benz, with the Audi following a close second and the BMW again bringing up the rear.

 

Practicality

Given that the Mercedes-Benz GLA casts a smaller shadow than the others, it stands to reason that there will be some compromises regarding its practicality as a result. Additionally, the MFA architecture employed by the GLA isn’t particularly space-efficient, which conspires with its smaller stature to rob it of both passenger- and luggage space.

The Audi demonstrates that it’s the newest design here, as well as the longest, which leads to a very spacious cabin and the biggest boot in this comparison. However, when the rear seats are folded down, the BMW narrowly takes the lead in maximum utility space, most likely as a result of its added width and higher roof. 

Seen in the context of a passenger vehicle, the Audi has to emerge as the winner on practicality, thanks to that cavernous boot and ample cabin space, but there’s not dishonour in BMW’s second place, either – that marginally larger total utility space should come in handy if you’re planning to haul sizeable loads. The Mercedes finishes last in this department.

 

Equipment and safety

Being the oldest design in this comparison, the GLA doesn’t yet benefit from Mercedes’s newest electronic architecture. That means that there’s no MBUX interface with its “Hey Mercedes” functionality to its older-tech voice control system, and the display units on the dashboard also stem from an earlier era. 

At the other side of the spectrum, the Audi’s cutting-edge cabin design and display screens are clearly more modern than those in either of the other two, which hands it an immediate advantage. That said, the X1’s cabin design is still modern enough, and eclipses the rather dated-looking GLA in both material quality and available technology, even if neither can quite match the Q3’s all-round excellence in this regard.

With that said, all three cars have reasonably comprehensive standard equipment levels. Common to all three cars are cruise control, air conditioning and other bare necessities for this class. The X1 is the only one to offer navigation as standard, however, but the Audi counters this with LED headlights, rear parking sensors and automatic climate control, all of which are optional on the others (as are a rear parking camera and parking sensors all round, which are optional for all three). As usual with these premium brands, you’ll need to pay extra for the nicer things...

Safety is more or less an even match, although the Mercedes has the advantage of a driver’s knee airbag as standard, bringing its total standard airbag count up to 7 instead of the 6 airbags fitted to the Audi and BMW. All three cars have ABS, stability- and traction control, ISOFIX child seat anchors, and 5-star Euro-NCAP crash safety ratings, so there isn’t much to choose between them in this regard. However, the Audi’s standard LED headlights and rear parking sensors add an extra measure of practical safety, which hands it the victory in the safety department as well.

 

Verdict

In spite of its performance- and fuel consumption advantages, the Mercedes-Benz GLA200 has to be the first to be eliminated, purely because it lags so far on standard equipment and practicality. Adding insult to injury, it’s less than R13 000 cheaper than the Audi, with a maintenance plan that merely matches those of its opponents at 5 years or 100 000 km. There’s no way to ignore the GLA’s age, but there’s also reason to expect that the next-generation model (due in a year’s time or so) will represent a big improvement on the current car, just as the new A-Class is a huge improvement on its predecessor.

With the lowest list price here, the BMW appears to be very good value for money in comparison to the other two contenders. However, it’s surprisingly sparsely-equipped for the money, with that standard navigation really being its only unique selling point. Adding options to achieve price- and equipment parity with the Audi may give you about the same trim specifications, but then it will still lag in terms of performance and economy. This relegates the BMW X1 sDrive18i to second place in this comparison.

The Audi Q3 35TFSI may seem rather pricey at first glance, but its combination of standard features, practicality, competitive fuel efficiency and the most upmarket cabin sees it take the victory here. Although its opponents trounce it in some individual considerations, the overall package offered by the Audi Q3 hands it the victory in this comparison. We suspect that this ranking may change somewhat when the X1 receives its mid-life facelift and when the next-generation GLA appears, however...

 

* Pricing was accurate at the time of writing, but may change without prior notice. 

 

Related Reading:

We rather liked the GLA when we had it on test, but found it to be a little too car-like.

Find out what makes the latest Mercedes A-Class such an excellent offering.

The Audi Q3 was revealed at the 2019 Festival of Motoring. Read about this glittering event here.

In a comparison against the previous-generation Q3, the BMW X1 walked away with a close victory.

The first-generation stood out as the driver's choice by virtue of its RWD-based platform...

... but the second generation brought its own virtues.

Find out more about Euro-NCAP safety ratings here.