Mazda 3 2011 vs Volvo V40 2012

 
Mazda 3
2011 - 2013
Volvo V40
2012 - 2016
Gearbox: ManualManual
Engine: 1.6 Petrol1.6 Petrol

Performance

Power: 105 HP150 HP
Torque: 145 NM240 NM
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: 12.2 seconds8.8 seconds
Volvo V40 is a more dynamic driving.
Mazda 3 engine produces 45 HP less power than Volvo V40, whereas torque is 95 NM less than Volvo V40. Due to the lower power, Mazda 3 reaches 100 km/h speed 3.4 seconds later.

Fuel consumption

Fuel consumption (l/100km): 6.45.4
Real fuel consumption: 7.4 l/100km6.7 l/100km
The Volvo V40 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy.
By specification Mazda 3 consumes 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 150 litres more fuel.
By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda 3 consumes 0.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo V40.
Fuel tank capacity: 55 litres62 litres
Full fuel tank distance: 850 km in combined cycle1140 km in combined cycle
1050 km on highway1340 km on highway
740 km with real consumption920 km with real consumption
Volvo V40 gets more mileage on one fuel tank.
Ground clearance: 155 mm (6.1 inches)133 mm (5.2 inches)
Because of the higher ground clearance, Mazda 3 can perform better on bad roads - it can go over higher obstacles and bumps. At the same time, the higher ground clearance can reduce stability and handling on paved roads, especially at higher speeds. Note, however, that this Mazda 3 version does not have 4x4 drive, which is very important in poor road conditions.

Dimensions

Length: 4.46 m4.37 m
Width: 1.76 m1.80 m
Height: 1.45 m1.44 m
Mazda 3 is 9 cm longer than the Volvo V40, 5 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda 3 is 2 cm higher.
Trunk capacity: 340 litres335 litres
Trunk max capacity:
with rear seats folded down
1360 litresno data
Mazda 3 has 5 litres more trunk space than the Volvo V40.
Turning diameter: 10.4 meters11.2 meters
The turning circle of the Mazda 3 is 0.8 metres less than that of the Volvo V40, which means Mazda 3 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces.
Gross weight (kg): 1`7701`910
Safety: no data
Quality:
high

below average
Mazda 3 has fewer problems.
According to annual technical inspection data Volvo V40 has serious deffects in 75 percent more cases than Mazda 3, so Mazda 3 quality is probably significantly better
Average price (€): 52009200
Pros and Cons: Mazda 3 has
  • higher ground clearance
  • better manoeuvrability
  • fewer faults
  • lower price
Volvo V40 has
  • more power
  • more dynamic
  • lower fuel consumption
  • more full fuel tank mileage
Share these results to social networks or e-mail
Contact us: info@auto-abc.lv