Volkswagen Passat 1985 vs Volvo S40 2000
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: | 2.2 Petrol | 1.9 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
Power: | 136 HP | 136 HP | |
Torque: | 184 NM | 190 NM | |
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.5 seconds | 9.7 seconds | |
Volkswagen Passat and Volvo S40 have the same engine power, but Volkswagen Passat torque is 6 NM less than Volvo S40. Volkswagen Passat reaches 100 km/h speed 0.2 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.0 | 8.3 | |
The Volvo S40 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Volkswagen Passat consumes 0.7 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 105 litres more fuel. | |||
Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 60 litres | |
Full fuel tank distance: | 660 km in combined cycle | 720 km in combined cycle | |
Volvo S40 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Dimensions | |||
Length: | 4.42 m | 4.48 m | |
Width: | 1.71 m | 1.72 m | |
Height: | 1.38 m | 1.41 m | |
Both cars are similar in size. Volkswagen Passat is 6 cm shorter than the Volvo S40, 1 cm narrower, while the height of Volkswagen Passat is 3 cm lower. | |||
Trunk capacity: | no data | 471 litres | |
Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 853 litres | |
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): | 1`500 | 1`750 | |
Safety: | no data | no data | |
Quality: | no data | average | |
Average price (€): | 1400 | 800 | |
Pros and Cons: |
|
Volvo S40 has
| |