Citroen Xsara 1998 vs Volvo S40 1999
| Body: | Coupe | Sedan | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
| Engine: | 1.8 Petrol | 1.8 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 103 HP | 122 HP | |
| Torque: | 153 NM | 170 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 15.4 seconds | 12 seconds | |
|
Volvo S40 is a more dynamic driving. Citroen Xsara engine produces 19 HP less power than Volvo S40, whereas torque is 17 NM less than Volvo S40. Due to the lower power, Citroen Xsara reaches 100 km/h speed 3.4 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.1 | 8.9 | |
| Citroen Xsara consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo S40, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Citroen Xsara could require 30 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 54 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 590 km in combined cycle | 670 km in combined cycle | |
| 780 km on highway | 860 km on highway | ||
| Volvo S40 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.17 m | 4.48 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.72 m | |
| Height: | 1.40 m | 1.41 m | |
|
Citroen Xsara is smaller. Citroen Xsara is 31 cm shorter than the Volvo S40, 2 cm narrower, while the height of Citroen Xsara is 1 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 471 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 853 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.7 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Citroen Xsara is 0.3 metres less than that of the Volvo S40. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`100 | 1`780 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | below average | |
| Volvo S40 has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Citroen Xsara, so Volvo S40 quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 800 | 600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
|
Volvo S40 has
| |