Volkswagen Passat 2012 vs Volvo V40 2012
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 1.6 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 170 HP | 115 HP | |
| Torque: | 350 NM | 270 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.9 seconds | 12.3 seconds | |
|
Volkswagen Passat is more dynamic to drive. Volkswagen Passat engine produces 55 HP more power than Volvo V40, whereas torque is 80 NM more than Volvo V40. Thanks to more power Volkswagen Passat reaches 100 km/h speed 3.4 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.9 | 3.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.1 l/100km | 5.0 l/100km | |
|
The Volvo V40 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volkswagen Passat consumes 2.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo V40, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Volkswagen Passat could require 345 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volkswagen Passat consumes 2.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo V40. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 70 litres | 62 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1180 km in combined cycle | 1720 km in combined cycle | |
| 1320 km on highway | 1820 km on highway | ||
| 980 km with real consumption | 1240 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. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 560'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Volvo V40 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 6 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including Volkswagen Sharan, Audi A3, Skoda Superb | Installed on at least 6 other car models, including Volvo V70, Volvo S80, Volvo S60, Volvo S40, Volvo V60 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Volkswagen Passat might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Volvo V40 2012 1.6 engine: The main issues reported by owners are frequent oil and coolant leaks. The Siemens fuel system with piezo injectors is highly sensitive to fuel quality, requiring the use of high-grade diesel to avoid ... More about Volvo V40 2012 1.6 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.77 m | 4.37 m | |
| Width: | 1.82 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.52 m | 1.44 m | |
|
Volkswagen Passat is larger. Volkswagen Passat is 41 cm longer than the Volvo V40, 2 cm wider, while the height of Volkswagen Passat is 8 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 588 litres | 335 litres | |
|
Volkswagen Passat has more luggage capacity. Volkswagen Passat has 253 litres more trunk space than the Volvo V40. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.4 meters | 11.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volkswagen Passat is 0.2 metres more than that of the Volvo V40. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`300 | 1`890 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Volvo V40 scores higher in safety tests, butVolkswagen Passat 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 Volkswagen Passat has serious deffects in 55 percent more cases than Volvo V40, so Volvo V40 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 16 200 | 7400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volkswagen Passat has
|
Volvo V40 has
| |