Kia Cerato 2010 vs Volvo V40 2012
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
| Body: | Coupe | Hatchback | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gearbox: | Manual/Automatic | Manual/Automatic | |
| Engines: | 1.6 - 2.0 (petrol) | 1.6 - 2.5 (petrol, diesel) | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 126 - 156 HP | 115 - 254 HP | |
| Torque: | 157 - 194 NM | 220 - 400 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.3 - 11.8 seconds | 6.3 - 12.3 seconds | |
| Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.7 - 7.8 | 3.2 - 9.0 | |
|
Kia Cerato petrol engines consumes on average 0.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than Volvo V40. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.48 m | 4.37 m | |
| Width: | 1.78 m | 1.83 m | |
| Height: | 1.40 m | 1.44 m | |
| Kia Cerato is 11 cm longer than the Volvo V40, 6 cm narrower, while the height of Kia Cerato is 4 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 440 litres | 335 litres | |
|
Kia Cerato has more luggage capacity. Kia Cerato has 105 litres more trunk space than the Volvo V40. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.2 meters | 11.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Kia Cerato is 1 metres less than that of the Volvo V40, which means Kia Cerato can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | ~ 1`976 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | above average | |
| Average price (€): | no data | 9000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Kia Cerato has
|
Volvo V40 has
| |