Volvo C30 2009 vs Kia Ceed 2010
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Diesel | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Diesel (Volvo C30) engines typically outperform gasoline engines in terms of fuel efficiency and low-end torque. This makes them more economical and better suited for towing or long-distance travel. However, gasoline (Kia Ceed) engines mostly are lighter, quieter, and offer better acceleration and responsiveness, especially in smaller vehicles. For more information, see the article "Diesel or Petrol: Fuel Economy and Key Differences." | |||
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain and belt | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 109 HP | 126 HP | |
| Torque: | 240 NM | 157 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.3 seconds | 10.9 seconds | |
|
Kia Ceed is a more dynamic driving. Volvo C30 engine produces 17 HP less power than Kia Ceed, but torque is 83 NM more than Kia Ceed. Due to the lower power, Volvo C30 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.4 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.5 | 5.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 5.2 l/100km | 7.4 l/100km | |
|
The Volvo C30 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volvo C30 consumes 1.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Kia Ceed, which means that by driving the Volvo C30 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 210 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volvo C30 consumes 2.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Kia Ceed. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 52 litres | 53 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1150 km in combined cycle | 890 km in combined cycle | |
| 1360 km on highway | 1000 km on highway | ||
| 1000 km with real consumption | 710 km with real consumption | ||
| Volvo C30 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 | 280'000 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 C30 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 19 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Volvo S80, Volvo S40, Volvo V50 | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including Hyundai Elantra, Hyundai i30, Hyundai Accent, Kia RIO | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Kia Ceed might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Volvo C30 engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
| Kia Ceed 2010 1.6 engine: Overall, the engine is reliable and not very demanding on fuel quality. Fuel injectors tend to be noisy. Timing chain resource is relatively low. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.27 m | 4.26 m | |
| Width: | 1.78 m | 1.79 m | |
| Height: | 1.44 m | 1.48 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Volvo C30 and Kia Ceed are practically the same length. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 251 litres | 340 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1300 litres | |
|
Kia Ceed has more luggage space. Volvo C30 has 89 litres less trunk space than the Kia Ceed. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 10.3 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volvo C30 is 0.3 metres more than that of the Kia Ceed. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`780 | 1`710 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | below average | |
| Kia Ceed has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Volvo C30, so Kia Ceed quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 4200 | 3600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo C30 has
|
Kia Ceed has
| |