Mazda 3 2019 vs Volvo V40 2016
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.5 Petrol | 1.5 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 120 HP | 152 HP | |
| Torque: | 150 NM | 250 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.4 seconds | 8.3 seconds | |
|
Volvo V40 is a more dynamic driving. Mazda 3 engine produces 32 HP less power than Volvo V40, whereas torque is 100 NM less than Volvo V40. Due to the lower power, Mazda 3 reaches 100 km/h speed 4.1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.0 | 5.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.6 l/100km | 7.6 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 3 is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Mazda 3 consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo V40, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda 3 could require 15 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Mazda 3 consumes 1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo V40. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 51 litres | 62 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 850 km in combined cycle | 1050 km in combined cycle | |
| 1010 km on highway | 1210 km on highway | ||
| 770 km with real consumption | 810 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.46 m | 4.37 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.44 m | 1.44 m | |
| Mazda 3 is 9 cm longer than the Volvo V40, width is practically the same also the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 295 litres | 324 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
1019 litres | 1500 litres | |
|
Volvo V40 has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, This could mean that the Mazda 3 uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Volvo V40 (by 481 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 3 is 0.2 metres less than that of the Volvo V40. | |||
| Gross weight: | no data | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | low | above average | |
| Volvo V40 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mazda 3 has serious deffects in 60 percent more cases than Volvo V40, so Volvo V40 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 21 600 | 11 600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
|
Volvo V40 has
| |