Mazda 3 2013 vs Volvo V40 2015
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.2 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 152 HP | |
| Torque: | 380 NM | 250 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.1 seconds | 8.3 seconds | |
|
Mazda 3 is more dynamic to drive. Mazda 3 engine produces 2 HP less power than Volvo V40, but torque is 130 NM more than Volvo V40. Despite less power, Mazda 3 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.2 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.1 | 5.5 | |
|
The Mazda 3 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Mazda 3 consumes 1.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo V40, which means that by driving the Mazda 3 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 210 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 51 litres | 62 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1240 km in combined cycle | 1120 km in combined cycle | |
| Mazda 3 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 m | 4.37 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.86 m | |
| Height: | 1.45 m | 1.44 m | |
| Mazda 3 is 9 cm longer than the Volvo V40, 6 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda 3 is 1 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 364 litres | 335 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1263 litres | no data | |
|
Mazda 3 has more luggage capacity. Mazda 3 has 29 litres more trunk space than the Volvo V40. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 11.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 3 is 0.6 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`910 | no data | |
| Safety: | |||
| Volvo V40 scores higher in safety tests, butMazda 3 is better rated in child safety tests. The Volvo V40 scores significantly higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | average | above average | |
| Volvo V40 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mazda 3 has serious deffects in 15 percent more cases than Volvo V40, so Volvo V40 quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 7000 | 8200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 3 has
|
Volvo V40 has
| |