Volkswagen Beetle 2013 vs Volvo V40 2016
| Body: | Cabrio | Hatchback | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 140 HP | 120 HP | |
| Torque: | 320 NM | 280 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.9 seconds | 10.5 seconds | |
|
Volkswagen Beetle is more dynamic to drive. Volkswagen Beetle engine produces 20 HP more power than Volvo V40, whereas torque is 40 NM more than Volvo V40. Thanks to more power Volkswagen Beetle reaches 100 km/h speed 0.6 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.1 | 3.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.1 l/100km | 4.9 l/100km | |
|
The Volvo V40 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volkswagen Beetle 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 Volkswagen Beetle could require 255 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volkswagen Beetle consumes 1.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo V40. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 40 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1070 km in combined cycle | 1170 km in combined cycle | |
| 1240 km on highway | 1250 km on highway | ||
| 900 km with real consumption | 810 km with real consumption | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 390'000 km | 420'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 8 years | 4 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 12 other car models, including Volkswagen Passat, Volkswagen Golf, Volkswagen Sharan, Audi A3 | Used also on Volvo V40 Cross Country | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Volkswagen Beetle might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Volkswagen Beetle 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. | |||
| Volkswagen Beetle 2013 2.0 engine: The engine is very durable and can last a long time with proper maintenance, and is also quite economical for its power. There may be some problems with the turbine geometry. It is important to use good ... More about Volkswagen Beetle 2013 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.28 m | 4.37 m | |
| Width: | 1.81 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.47 m | 1.44 m | |
| Volkswagen Beetle is 9 cm shorter than the Volvo V40, width is practically the same , while the height of Volkswagen Beetle is 3 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 225 litres | 335 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1500 litres | |
|
Volvo V40 has more luggage space. Volkswagen Beetle has 110 litres less trunk space than the Volvo V40. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`870 | 1`920 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | average | above average | |
| Volvo V40 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Volkswagen Beetle has serious deffects in 15 percent more cases than Volvo V40, so Volvo V40 quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 11 200 | 11 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volkswagen Beetle has
|
Volvo V40 has
| |