Mazda 3 2003 vs Volvo S40 2002
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.9 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 105 HP | 102 HP | |
| Torque: | 145 NM | 215 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11 seconds | 12 seconds | |
|
Mazda 3 is more dynamic to drive. Mazda 3 engine produces 3 HP more power than Volvo S40, but torque is 70 NM less than Volvo S40. Thanks to more power Mazda 3 reaches 100 km/h speed 1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.2 | 5.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.8 l/100km | 5.6 l/100km | |
|
The Volvo S40 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 S40, 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 2.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo S40. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 760 km in combined cycle | 1110 km in combined cycle | |
| 910 km on highway | 1420 km on highway | ||
| 700 km with real consumption | 1070 km with real consumption | ||
| Volvo S40 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Mazda 3 2003 1.6 engine: This engine is widely regarded as reliable, though it can develop certain issues over time. One of the most common problems is increased oil consumption, often starting after 120,000 km. This is frequently ... More about Mazda 3 2003 1.6 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.49 m | 4.48 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.72 m | |
| Height: | 1.46 m | 1.41 m | |
|
Mazda 3 is larger. Mazda 3 is 1 cm longer than the Volvo S40, 4 cm wider, while the height of Mazda 3 is 5 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 413 litres | 471 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
675 litres | 853 litres | |
|
Volvo S40 has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Mazda 3 has 58 litres less trunk space than the Volvo S40. This could mean that the Mazda 3 uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Volvo S40 (by 178 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.3 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 3 is 0.7 metres less than that of the Volvo S40, which means Mazda 3 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`675 | 1`770 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | above average | average | |
| Mazda 3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Volvo S40 has serious deffects in 10 percent more cases than Mazda 3, so Mazda 3 quality is probably slightly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 1400 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.2/10 | 8.0/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 3 has
|
Volvo S40 has
| |