Volkswagen Passat 1981 vs Volvo S40 1995
| Body: | Hatchback | Sedan | |
|---|---|---|---|
| The hatchback generally has more luggage space thanks to a larger trunk door opening and the ability to convert the rear of the passenger compartment into luggage space. Sedans tend to be quieter than hatchbacks, due to a more isolated rear area. | |||
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 75 HP | 105 HP | |
| Torque: | 119 NM | 143 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 14 seconds | 13 seconds | |
|
Volvo S40 is a more dynamic driving. Volkswagen Passat engine produces 30 HP less power than Volvo S40, whereas torque is 24 NM less than Volvo S40. Due to the lower power, Volkswagen Passat reaches 100 km/h speed 1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.0 | 8.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.6 l/100km | 8.8 l/100km | |
|
By specification Volkswagen Passat consumes 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo S40, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Volkswagen Passat could require 75 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Volkswagen Passat consumes 0.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo S40. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 660 km in combined cycle | 700 km in combined cycle | |
| 690 km with real consumption | 680 km with real consumption | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Volvo S40) have better traction on slippery roads and when climbing hills, better fuel economy, and are less expensive to purchase. On the disadvantage side, FWD cars usually have less towing capacity, poorer acceleration and harder handling. Rear-wheel drive cars (Volkswagen Passat) have better handling on dry roads, better acceleration, more even weight distribution and more fun to drive. RWD is also better for towing large loads. The cons of rear-wheel drive are less interior and trunk space and more difficulty maneuvering in wet and snowy conditions. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.44 m | 4.48 m | |
| Width: | 1.68 m | 1.72 m | |
| Height: | 1.38 m | 1.41 m | |
|
Volkswagen Passat is smaller. Volkswagen Passat is 4 cm shorter than the Volvo S40, 4 cm narrower, while the height of Volkswagen Passat is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 390 litres | 415 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 853 litres | |
|
Volvo S40 has more luggage space. Volkswagen Passat has 25 litres less trunk space than the Volvo S40. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.7 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volkswagen Passat is 0.3 metres less than that of the Volvo S40. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 1`750 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | average | |
| Average price (€): | 400 | 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volkswagen Passat has
|
Volvo S40 has
| |