Nissan Pulsar 2014 vs Volvo V40 2016
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.5 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 110 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 260 NM | 320 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.5 seconds | 8.4 seconds | |
|
Volvo V40 is a more dynamic driving. Nissan Pulsar engine produces 40 HP less power than Volvo V40, whereas torque is 60 NM less than Volvo V40. Due to the lower power, Nissan Pulsar reaches 100 km/h speed 3.1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 3.6 | 3.6 | |
| Fuel tank capacity: | 46 litres | 62 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1270 km in combined cycle | 1720 km in combined cycle | |
| 1390 km on highway | 1820 km on highway | ||
| 900 km with real consumption | 1140 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. | |||
| Nissan Pulsar 2014 1.5 engine: The engine has many modifications, is sufficiently common and spare parts are available. The fuel consumption/power ratio is good. The fuel injection system can be a problem and the timing belt change interval ... More about Nissan Pulsar 2014 1.5 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.39 m | 4.37 m | |
| Width: | 1.77 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.52 m | 1.44 m | |
| Nissan Pulsar is 2 cm longer than the Volvo V40, 3 cm narrower, while the height of Nissan Pulsar is 8 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 385 litres | 335 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1395 litres | 1500 litres | |
| Nissan Pulsar has 50 litres more trunk space than the Volvo V40. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Volvo V40 (by 105 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.2 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Nissan Pulsar is 0.6 metres less than that of the Volvo V40, which means Nissan Pulsar can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`785 | 1`980 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | above average | |
| Volvo V40 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Nissan Pulsar has serious deffects in 15 percent more cases than Volvo V40, so Volvo V40 quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 6400 | 11 400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan Pulsar has
|
Volvo V40 has
| |