Nissan Pulsar 2014 vs Volvo V40 2012
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.5 Diesel | 1.6 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 110 HP | 115 HP | |
| Torque: | 260 NM | 270 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.5 seconds | 12.3 seconds | |
| Nissan Pulsar engine produces 5 HP less power than Volvo V40, whereas torque is 10 NM less than Volvo V40. Despite less power, Nissan Pulsar reaches 100 km/h speed 0.8 seconds faster. | |||
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 | 1240 km with real consumption | ||
| Volvo V40 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Ground clearance: | 156 mm (6.1 inches) | 133 mm (5.2 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Nissan Pulsar 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. Note, however, that this Nissan Pulsar version does not have 4x4 drive, which is very important in poor road conditions. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 8 years | 6 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 22 other car models, including Nissan Qashqai, Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Dacia Duster, Nissan Juke | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Volvo V70, Volvo S80, Volvo S60, Volvo V60 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Nissan Pulsar might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Volvo V40 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: | 4.39 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 | no data | |
|
Nissan Pulsar has more luggage capacity. Nissan Pulsar has 50 litres more trunk space than the Volvo V40. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.2 meters | 11.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Nissan Pulsar is 1 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`890 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Volvo V40 scores higher in safety tests, butNissan Pulsar is better rated in child safety tests. The Volvo V40 scores significantly higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | below average | above average | |
| Volvo V40 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Nissan Pulsar has serious deffects in 45 percent more cases than Volvo V40, so Volvo V40 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 7600 | 9000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan Pulsar has
|
Volvo V40 has
| |