Rover 25 2004 vs Volvo V40 2016
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.8 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 115 HP | 122 HP | |
| Torque: | 160 NM | 220 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.3 seconds | 9.8 seconds | |
|
Volvo V40 is a more dynamic driving. Rover 25 engine produces 7 HP less power than Volvo V40, whereas torque is 60 NM less than Volvo V40. Due to the lower power, Rover 25 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.5 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.2 | 5.4 | |
|
The Volvo V40 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Rover 25 consumes 2.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo V40, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Rover 25 could require 420 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 50 litres | 62 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 600 km in combined cycle | 1140 km in combined cycle | |
| 790 km on highway | 1400 km on highway | ||
| 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.99 m | 4.37 m | |
| Width: | 1.69 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.44 m | |
|
Rover 25 is smaller. Rover 25 is 38 cm shorter than the Volvo V40, 11 cm narrower, while the height of Rover 25 is 2 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 335 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1500 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Rover 25 is 0.8 metres less than that of the Volvo V40, which means Rover 25 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`500 | 1`965 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | above average | |
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 12 200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Rover 25 has
|
Volvo V40 has
| |