Volvo XC40 2017 vs Renault Kadjar 2015
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 1.5 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 110 HP | |
| Torque: | 350 NM | 260 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.2 seconds | 11.9 seconds | |
|
Volvo XC40 is more dynamic to drive. Volvo XC40 engine produces 40 HP more power than Renault Kadjar, whereas torque is 90 NM more than Renault Kadjar. Thanks to more power Volvo XC40 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.7 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.1 | 3.8 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.3 l/100km | 5.5 l/100km | |
|
The Renault Kadjar is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volvo XC40 consumes 1.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Renault Kadjar, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Volvo XC40 could require 195 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volvo XC40 consumes 0.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Renault Kadjar. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 54 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1050 km in combined cycle | 1570 km in combined cycle | |
| 1140 km on highway | 1660 km on highway | ||
| 850 km with real consumption | 1090 km with real consumption | ||
| Renault Kadjar gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Renault Kadjar 2015 1.5 engine: The engine has many modifications, is sufficiently common and spare parts are available. The fuel consumption/power ratio is good. The fuel injection system can be a problem and the timing belt change interval ... More about Renault Kadjar 2015 1.5 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.43 m | 4.45 m | |
| Width: | 1.86 m | 1.84 m | |
| Height: | 1.65 m | 1.61 m | |
| Volvo XC40 is 2 cm shorter than the Renault Kadjar, 3 cm wider, while the height of Volvo XC40 is 5 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 460 litres | 472 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1478 litres | |
| Volvo XC40 has 12 litres less trunk space than the Renault Kadjar. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.4 meters | 10.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volvo XC40 is 0.7 metres more than that of the Renault Kadjar, which means Volvo XC40 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`180 | 1`916 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Volvo XC40 scores higher in safety tests, but Renault Kadjar is better rated in child safety tests. The Volvo XC40 scores higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | no data | average | |
| Average price (€): | 24 200 | 11 000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo XC40 has
|
Renault Kadjar has
| |