Volvo 940 1996 vs Mitsubishi Galant 1997
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.3 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 165 HP | 136 HP | |
| Torque: | 264 NM | 178 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.1 seconds | 9.7 seconds | |
|
Volvo 940 is more dynamic to drive. Volvo 940 engine produces 29 HP more power than Mitsubishi Galant, whereas torque is 86 NM more than Mitsubishi Galant. Thanks to more power Volvo 940 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.6 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.9 | 8.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 10.6 l/100km | 9.3 l/100km | |
|
The Mitsubishi Galant is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volvo 940 consumes 1.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Galant, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Volvo 940 could require 210 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volvo 940 consumes 1.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Galant. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 75 litres | 64 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 750 km in combined cycle | 750 km in combined cycle | |
| 700 km with real consumption | 680 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 (Mitsubishi Galant) 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: | 4.87 m | 4.63 m | |
| Width: | 1.75 m | 1.74 m | |
| Height: | 1.41 m | 1.42 m | |
|
Volvo 940 is larger, but slightly lower. Volvo 940 is 24 cm longer than the Mitsubishi Galant, 1 cm wider the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 471 litres | 470 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1400 litres | |
| Volvo 940 has 1 litres more trunk space than the Mitsubishi Galant. | |||
| Turning diameter: | no data | 10.8 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`905 | 1`850 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | Mitsubishi Galant has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Volvo 940 has serious deffects in 220 percent more cases than Mitsubishi Galant, so Mitsubishi Galant quality is probably significantly better | ||
| Average price (€): | 1600 | 2000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo 940 has
|
Mitsubishi Galant has
| |