BMW 3 series 2001 vs Volvo S40 2002
| Body: | Hatchback | Sedan | |
|---|---|---|---|
| The hatchback generally has more luggage space thanks to a larger trunk door opening and the ability to convert the rear of the passenger compartment into luggage space. Sedans tend to be quieter than hatchbacks, due to a more isolated rear area. | |||
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 1.9 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 102 HP | |
| Torque: | 330 NM | 215 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.9 seconds | 12 seconds | |
|
BMW 3 series is more dynamic to drive. BMW 3 series engine produces 48 HP more power than Volvo S40, whereas torque is 115 NM more than Volvo S40. Thanks to more power BMW 3 series reaches 100 km/h speed 3.1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.5 | 5.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.5 l/100km | 5.6 l/100km | |
|
The Volvo S40 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification BMW 3 series consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo S40, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the BMW 3 series could require 15 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, BMW 3 series consumes 0.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo S40. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 63 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1140 km in combined cycle | 1110 km in combined cycle | |
| 1430 km on highway | 1420 km on highway | ||
| 960 km with real consumption | 1070 km with real consumption | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Volvo S40) have better traction on slippery roads and when climbing hills, better fuel economy, and are less expensive to purchase. On the disadvantage side, FWD cars usually have less towing capacity, poorer acceleration and harder handling. Rear-wheel drive cars (BMW 3 series) have better handling on dry roads, better acceleration, more even weight distribution and more fun to drive. RWD is also better for towing large loads. The cons of rear-wheel drive are less interior and trunk space and more difficulty maneuvering in wet and snowy conditions. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.26 m | 4.48 m | |
| Width: | 1.75 m | 1.72 m | |
| Height: | 1.41 m | 1.41 m | |
| BMW 3 series is 22 cm shorter than the Volvo S40, 3 cm wider the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 310 litres | 471 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1100 litres | 853 litres | |
| BMW 3 series has 161 litres less trunk space than the Volvo S40. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in BMW 3 series (by 247 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the BMW 3 series is 1 metres less than that of the Volvo S40, which means BMW 3 series can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`895 | 1`770 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | low | |
| BMW 3 series has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Volvo S40, so BMW 3 series quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 2200 | 1200 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.9/10 | 8.0/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
BMW 3 sērija has
|
Volvo S40 has
| |