Mazda 3 2006 vs Volvo S40 2004
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 109 HP | 136 HP | |
| Torque: | 245 NM | 340 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.5 seconds | 9.5 seconds | |
|
Volvo S40 is a more dynamic driving. Mazda 3 engine produces 27 HP less power than Volvo S40, whereas torque is 95 NM less than Volvo S40. Due to the lower power, Mazda 3 reaches 100 km/h speed 2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.8 | 5.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.0 l/100km | 6.1 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 3 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mazda 3 consumes 0.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo S40, which means that by driving the Mazda 3 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 120 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda 3 consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo S40. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1140 km in combined cycle | 980 km in combined cycle | |
| 1340 km on highway | 1220 km on highway | ||
| 910 km with real consumption | 900 km with real consumption | ||
| Mazda 3 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.49 m | 4.47 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.77 m | |
| Height: | 1.47 m | 1.45 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Mazda 3 is 2 cm longer than the Volvo S40, 2 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda 3 is 2 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 413 litres | 404 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1285 litres | 883 litres | |
| Mazda 3 has 9 litres more trunk space than the Volvo S40. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mazda 3 (by 402 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.9 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 3 is 0.1 metres less than that of the Volvo S40. | |||
| Power steering: | Electric power steering | Hydraulic power steering | |
| Electric power steering is simpler, quieter, more fuel-efficient, more configurable and provides additional features such as auto-steering for lane assist and parking. The disadvantages of electric power steering are possible overheating under prolonged load conditions and insufficient feedback (feeling) during steering. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`810 | 1`940 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | average | average | |
| Volvo S40 has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Mazda 3, so Volvo S40 quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 2200 | 2200 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.8/10 | 8.6/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 3 has
|
Volvo S40 has
| |