Mazda 323 1999 vs Volvo S40 2006
| Body: | Hatchback | Sedan | |
|---|---|---|---|
| The hatchback generally has more luggage space thanks to a larger trunk door opening and the ability to convert the rear of the passenger compartment into luggage space. Sedans tend to be quieter than hatchbacks, due to a more isolated rear area. | |||
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 1.3 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 75 HP | 100 HP | |
| Torque: | 108 NM | 150 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 14.2 seconds | 12 seconds | |
|
Volvo S40 is a more dynamic driving. Mazda 323 engine produces 25 HP less power than Volvo S40, whereas torque is 42 NM less than Volvo S40. Due to the lower power, Mazda 323 reaches 100 km/h speed 2.2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.3 | 7.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.7 l/100km | 7.8 l/100km | |
|
By specification Mazda 323 consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo S40, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda 323 could require 15 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Mazda 323 consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo S40. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 750 km in combined cycle | 760 km in combined cycle | |
| 880 km on highway | 940 km on highway | ||
| 710 km with real consumption | 700 km with real consumption | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 380'000 km | 440'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Volvo S40 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 18 years | 6 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Volvo V50, Volvo C30 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Mazda 323 engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.20 m | 4.47 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.77 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.45 m | |
|
Mazda 323 is smaller. Mazda 323 is 27 cm shorter than the Volvo S40, 7 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda 323 is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 355 litres | 404 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1000 litres | 883 litres | |
| Mazda 323 has 49 litres less trunk space than the Volvo S40. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mazda 323 (by 117 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 323 is 0.6 metres less than that of the Volvo S40, which means Mazda 323 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`585 | 1`800 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | above average | |
| Volvo S40 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mazda 323 has serious deffects in 180 percent more cases than Volvo S40, so Volvo S40 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 600 | 2200 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.0/10 | 8.6/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 323 has
|
Volvo S40 has
| |