Mazda CX-30 2019 vs Volvo XC40 2017
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 180 HP | 249 HP | |
| Torque: | 224 NM | 350 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.8 seconds | 6.5 seconds | |
|
Volvo XC40 is a more dynamic driving. Mazda CX-30 engine produces 69 HP less power than Volvo XC40, whereas torque is 126 NM less than Volvo XC40. Due to the lower power, Mazda CX-30 reaches 100 km/h speed 2.3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.2 | 7.1 | |
|
The Mazda CX-30 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Mazda CX-30 consumes 1.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo XC40, which means that by driving the Mazda CX-30 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 285 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 51 litres | 54 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 980 km in combined cycle | 760 km in combined cycle | |
| 1100 km on highway | 900 km on highway | ||
| Mazda CX-30 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
| Ground clearance: | 175 mm (6.9 inches) | 211 mm (8.3 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Volvo XC40 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. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 350'000 km | 390'000 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 XC40 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 7 years | 11 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Mazda 3 | Installed on at least 7 other car models, including Volvo S60, Volvo XC90, Volvo XC60, Volvo V60, Volvo S90 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Volvo XC40 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.40 m | 4.43 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.86 m | |
| Height: | 1.56 m | 1.65 m | |
|
Mazda CX-30 is smaller. Mazda CX-30 is 3 cm shorter than the Volvo XC40, 7 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda CX-30 is 9 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 430 litres | 460 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
1406 litres | 1336 litres | |
| Mazda CX-30 has 30 litres less trunk space than the Volvo XC40. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mazda CX-30 (by 70 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.4 meters | 11.4 meters | |
| Gross weight: | 1`965 kg | 2`220 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`391 kg | 1`680 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 574 kg | 540 kg | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 21 400 | 21 200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda CX-30 has
|
Volvo XC40 has
| |