Volvo 940 1990 vs Honda Accord 1995
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.3 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 131 HP | 136 HP | |
| Torque: | 185 NM | 184 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11 seconds | 10.8 seconds | |
|
Honda Accord is a more dynamic driving. Volvo 940 engine produces 5 HP less power than Honda Accord, but torque is 1 NM more than Honda Accord. Due to the lower power, Volvo 940 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.9 | 9.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.9 l/100km | 9.1 l/100km | |
|
The Honda Accord is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volvo 940 consumes 0.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Honda Accord, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Volvo 940 could require 135 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volvo 940 consumes 0.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Honda Accord. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 75 litres | 65 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 750 km in combined cycle | 720 km in combined cycle | |
| 750 km with real consumption | 710 km with real consumption | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Honda Accord) 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 (Volvo 940) 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: | 4.81 m | 4.77 m | |
| Width: | 1.75 m | 1.78 m | |
| Height: | 1.44 m | 1.42 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Volvo 940 is 4 cm longer than the Honda Accord, 3 cm narrower, while the height of Volvo 940 is 2 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 992 litres | 430 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
2125 litres | 739 litres | |
|
Volvo 940 has more luggage capacity. Volvo 940 has 562 litres more trunk space than the Honda Accord. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Volvo 940 (by 1386 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 9.9 meters | 11.1 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volvo 940 is 1.2 metres less than that of the Honda Accord, which means Volvo 940 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`950 | 1`880 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | above average | above average | |
| Volvo 940 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Honda Accord has serious deffects in 15 percent more cases than Volvo 940, so Volvo 940 quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 3400 | 4000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo 940 has
|
Honda Accord has
| |