Volvo V40 2002 vs BMW 3 series 2002
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.9 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 115 HP | 115 HP | |
| Torque: | 265 NM | 265 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.5 seconds | 11 seconds | |
| Volvo V40 and BMW 3 series have the same engine power, the torque is the same for both cars. Volvo V40 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.5 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.4 | 5.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.0 l/100km | 6.1 l/100km | |
|
The Volvo V40 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volvo V40 consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the BMW 3 series, which means that by driving the Volvo V40 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 75 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volvo V40 consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the BMW 3 series. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 63 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1110 km in combined cycle | 1060 km in combined cycle | |
| 1390 km on highway | 1280 km on highway | ||
| 1000 km with real consumption | 1030 km with real consumption | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | |
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 8 years | 9 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 11 other car models, including Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Volvo S40, Mitsubishi Carisma | Used also on BMW 5 sērija | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Volvo V40 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The BMW 3 series engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.48 m | 4.48 m | |
| Width: | 1.72 m | 1.74 m | |
| Height: | 1.41 m | 1.41 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Volvo V40 and BMW 3 series are practically the same length. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 413 litres | 435 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1420 litres | no data | |
|
BMW 3 series has more luggage space. Volvo V40 has 22 litres less trunk space than the BMW 3 series. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 10 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volvo V40 is 0.6 metres more than that of the BMW 3 series, which means Volvo V40 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`800 | 1`980 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | average | |
| Volvo V40 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data BMW 3 series has serious deffects in 30 percent more cases than Volvo V40, so Volvo V40 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1200 | 2400 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.4/10 | 7.9/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo V40 has
|
BMW 3 sērija has
| |