BMW 3 series 1993 vs Volvo S40 1996
| Body: | Cabrio | Sedan | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 1.9 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 140 HP | |
| Torque: | 190 NM | 183 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11 seconds | 9.7 seconds | |
| BMW 3 series engine produces 10 HP more power than Volvo S40, whereas torque is 7 NM more than Volvo S40. Despite the higher power, BMW 3 series reaches 100 km/h speed 1.3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.1 | 9.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.3 l/100km | 8.7 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 0.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo S40. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 65 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 710 km in combined cycle | 660 km in combined cycle | |
| 950 km on highway | 880 km on highway | ||
| 690 km with real consumption | 680 km with real consumption | ||
| BMW 3 series gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
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. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 560'000 km | 460'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a BMW 3 series engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 4 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on BMW 5 sērija | Used also on Volvo V40 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.43 m | 4.48 m | |
| Width: | 1.71 m | 1.72 m | |
| Height: | 1.35 m | 1.41 m | |
|
BMW 3 series is smaller. BMW 3 series is 5 cm shorter than the Volvo S40, 1 cm narrower, while the height of BMW 3 series is 6 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 230 litres | 471 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 853 litres | |
|
Volvo S40 has more luggage space. BMW 3 series has 241 litres less trunk space than the Volvo S40. | |||
| 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`810 | 1`720 | |
| Safety: | |||
| 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 BMW 3 series, so Volvo S40 quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 7600 | 800 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.0/10 | 7.1/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
BMW 3 sērija has
|
Volvo S40 has
| |