Mazda MX-5 2013 vs Volvo V40 2016
| Body: | Cabrio | Hatchback | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 1.8 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 126 HP | 122 HP | |
| Torque: | 167 NM | 220 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.9 seconds | 10.4 seconds | |
|
Mazda MX-5 is more dynamic to drive. Mazda MX-5 engine produces 4 HP more power than Volvo V40, but torque is 53 NM less than Volvo V40. Thanks to more power Mazda MX-5 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.5 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.1 | 5.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.7 l/100km | 7.1 l/100km | |
|
The Volvo V40 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mazda MX-5 consumes 1.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo V40, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda MX-5 could require 255 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda MX-5 consumes 0.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo V40. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 50 litres | 62 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 700 km in combined cycle | 1140 km in combined cycle | |
| 890 km on highway | 1400 km on highway | ||
| 640 km with real consumption | 870 km with real consumption | ||
| Volvo V40 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: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Volvo V40) have better traction on slippery roads and when climbing hills, better fuel economy, and are less expensive to purchase. On the disadvantage side, FWD cars usually have less towing capacity, poorer acceleration and harder handling. Rear-wheel drive cars (Mazda MX-5) have better handling on dry roads, better acceleration, more even weight distribution and more fun to drive. RWD is also better for towing large loads. The cons of rear-wheel drive are less interior and trunk space and more difficulty maneuvering in wet and snowy conditions. | |||
| Mazda MX-5 2013 1.8 engine: The engine often has unstable idling speeds and problems with the thermostat. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.02 m | 4.37 m | |
| Width: | 1.72 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.26 m | 1.44 m | |
|
Mazda MX-5 is smaller. Mazda MX-5 is 35 cm shorter than the Volvo V40, 8 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda MX-5 is 18 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 150 litres | 335 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1500 litres | |
|
Volvo V40 has more luggage space. Mazda MX-5 has 185 litres less trunk space than the Volvo V40. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda MX-5 is 0.8 metres less than that of the Volvo V40, which means Mazda MX-5 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`375 | 1`965 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | above average | |
| Average price (€): | no data | 11 400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda MX-5 has
|
Volvo V40 has
| |