Volvo XC40 2017 vs Jaguar E-Pace 2017
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 249 HP | 300 HP | |
| Torque: | 350 NM | 400 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 6.5 seconds | 6.4 seconds | |
| Volvo XC40 engine produces 51 HP less power than Jaguar E-Pace, whereas torque is 50 NM less than Jaguar E-Pace. Due to the lower power, Volvo XC40 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.1 | 8.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.5 l/100km | 10.9 l/100km | |
|
The Volvo XC40 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volvo XC40 consumes 0.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Jaguar E-Pace, which means that by driving the Volvo XC40 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 135 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volvo XC40 consumes 1.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Jaguar E-Pace. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 54 litres | 68 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 760 km in combined cycle | 850 km in combined cycle | |
| 900 km on highway | 970 km on highway | ||
| 560 km with real consumption | 620 km with real consumption | ||
| Jaguar E-Pace gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
| Ground clearance: | 211 mm (8.3 inches) | 204 mm (8 inches) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 390'000 km | 350'000 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 XC40 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 10 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 7 other car models, including Volvo S60, Volvo XC90, Volvo XC60, Volvo V60, Volvo S90 | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Jaguar F-Type, Jaguar XF, Jaguar XE | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Volvo XC40 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.43 m | 4.40 m | |
| Width: | 1.86 m | 1.98 m | |
| Height: | 1.65 m | 1.65 m | |
| Volvo XC40 is 3 cm longer than the Jaguar E-Pace, 12 cm narrower the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 460 litres | 1234 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1336 litres | 2577 litres | |
|
Jaguar E-Pace has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Volvo XC40 has 774 litres less trunk space than the Jaguar E-Pace. This could mean that the Volvo XC40 uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Jaguar E-Pace (by 1241 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.4 meters | 11.46 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volvo XC40 is 0.06 metres less than that of the Jaguar E-Pace. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`220 | 2`400 | |
| Safety: | |||
| The Volvo XC40 scores higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 24 200 | 22 400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo XC40 has
|
Jaguar E-Pace has
| |