Mazda 3 2013 vs Volvo V40 2012
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.2 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 380 NM | 350 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.7 seconds | 9.3 seconds | |
| Mazda 3 and Volvo V40 have the same engine power, but Mazda 3 torque is 30 NM more than Volvo V40. Mazda 3 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.4 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.8 | 5.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.6 l/100km | 6.0 l/100km | |
|
The Volvo V40 is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Mazda 3 consumes 0.4 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 60 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Mazda 3 consumes 0.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo V40. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 51 litres | 62 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1060 km in combined cycle | 1190 km in combined cycle | |
| 1240 km on highway | 1440 km on highway | ||
| 770 km with real consumption | 1030 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: | 4.47 m | 4.37 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.45 m | 1.45 m | |
| Mazda 3 is 10 cm longer than the Volvo V40, width is practically the same also the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| 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`930 | 2`040 | |
| 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 (€): | 7800 | 9200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 3 has
|
Volvo V40 has
| |