Mazda 3 2013 vs Volvo V40 2016

 
Mazda 3
2013 - 2016
Volvo V40
2016 - 2018
Gearbox: AutomaticManual
Engine: 2.0 Petrol2.0 Diesel

Performance

Power: 150 HP150 HP
Torque: 210 NM320 NM
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: 9 seconds8.4 seconds
Volvo V40 is a more dynamic driving.
Mazda 3 and Volvo V40 have the same engine power, but Mazda 3 torque is 110 NM less than Volvo V40. Mazda 3 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.6 seconds later.

Fuel consumption

Fuel consumption (l/100km): 6.23.6
The Volvo V40 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy.
Mazda 3 consumes 2.6 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 390 litres more fuel.
Fuel tank capacity: 51 litres62 litres
Full fuel tank distance: 820 km in combined cycle1720 km in combined cycle
860 km on highway1820 km on highway
Volvo V40 gets more mileage on one fuel tank.

Dimensions

Length: 4.47 m4.37 m
Width: 1.80 m1.80 m
Height: 1.45 m1.44 m
Mazda 3 is 10 cm longer than the Volvo V40, width is practically the same , while the height of Mazda 3 is 1 cm higher.
Trunk capacity: 364 litres335 litres
Trunk max capacity:
with rear seats folded down
1263 litres1500 litres
Mazda 3 has 29 litres more trunk space than the Volvo V40. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Volvo V40 (by 237 litres).
Turning diameter: 10.6 meters10.8 meters
The turning circle of the Mazda 3 is 0.2 metres less than that of the Volvo V40.
Gross weight (kg): 1`8351`980
Safety: no data
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 (€): 780013 200
Pros and Cons: Mazda 3 has
  • roomier boot
  • lower price
Volvo V40 has
  • more dynamic
  • lower fuel consumption
  • more full fuel tank mileage
  • fewer faults
Share these results to social networks or e-mail
Contact us: info@auto-abc.lv