Honda S2000 2004 vs Volvo V40 2016
| Body: | Cabrio | Hatchback | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 240 HP | 122 HP | |
| Torque: | 208 NM | 220 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 6.2 seconds | 10.4 seconds | |
|
Honda S2000 is more dynamic to drive. Honda S2000 engine produces 118 HP more power than Volvo V40, but torque is 12 NM less than Volvo V40. Thanks to more power Honda S2000 reaches 100 km/h speed 4.2 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.9 | 5.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.9 l/100km | 7.1 l/100km | |
|
The Volvo V40 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Honda S2000 consumes 4.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo V40, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Honda S2000 could require 675 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Honda S2000 consumes 2.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo V40. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 50 litres | 62 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 500 km in combined cycle | 1140 km in combined cycle | |
| 500 km with real consumption | 870 km with real consumption | ||
| Volvo V40 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 V40) 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 (Honda S2000) 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: | 4.14 m | 4.37 m | |
| Width: | 1.75 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.28 m | 1.44 m | |
|
Honda S2000 is smaller. Honda S2000 is 23 cm shorter than the Volvo V40, 5 cm narrower, while the height of Honda S2000 is 16 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 143 litres | 335 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1500 litres | |
|
Volvo V40 has more luggage space. Honda S2000 has 192 litres less trunk space than the Volvo V40. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`220 | 1`965 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | above average | |
| Average price (€): | no data | 12 200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Honda S2000 has
|
Volvo V40 has
| |