Mazda 3 2019 vs Volvo V40 2016
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 122 HP | 120 HP | |
| Torque: | 213 NM | 280 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.8 seconds | 10.5 seconds | |
|
Volvo V40 is a more dynamic driving. Mazda 3 engine produces 2 HP more power than Volvo V40, but torque is 67 NM less than Volvo V40. Despite the higher power, Mazda 3 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.5 | 3.7 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.7 l/100km | 5.4 l/100km | |
|
The Volvo V40 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mazda 3 consumes 1.8 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 270 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda 3 consumes 1.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo V40. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 51 litres | 40 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 920 km in combined cycle | 1080 km in combined cycle | |
| 1080 km on highway | 1170 km on highway | ||
| 760 km with real consumption | 740 km with real consumption | ||
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: | 330 litres | 335 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1019 litres | 1500 litres | |
| Mazda 3 has 5 litres less trunk space than the Volvo V40. 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 (kg): | 1`907 | 1`995 | |
| 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 (€): | 21 000 | 13 000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
|
Volvo V40 has
| |