Alfa Romeo 156 2003 vs Volvo S40 2004
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.9 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 140 HP | 136 HP | |
| Torque: | 305 NM | 340 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.3 seconds | 9.5 seconds | |
|
Alfa Romeo 156 is more dynamic to drive. Alfa Romeo 156 engine produces 4 HP more power than Volvo S40, but torque is 35 NM less than Volvo S40. Thanks to more power Alfa Romeo 156 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.2 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.9 | 5.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.7 l/100km | 6.1 l/100km | |
|
The Volvo S40 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Alfa Romeo 156 consumes 0.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo S40, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Alfa Romeo 156 could require 45 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Alfa Romeo 156 consumes 0.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo S40. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 63 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1060 km in combined cycle | 980 km in combined cycle | |
| 1340 km on highway | 1220 km on highway | ||
| 940 km with real consumption | 900 km with real consumption | ||
| Alfa Romeo 156 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.44 m | 4.47 m | |
| Width: | 1.74 m | 1.77 m | |
| Height: | 1.43 m | 1.45 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Alfa Romeo 156 is 3 cm shorter than the Volvo S40, 3 cm narrower, while the height of Alfa Romeo 156 is 2 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 378 litres | 404 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 883 litres | |
|
Volvo S40 has more luggage space. Alfa Romeo 156 has 26 litres less trunk space than the Volvo S40. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.6 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Alfa Romeo 156 is 0.6 metres more than that of the Volvo S40, which means Alfa Romeo 156 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`770 | 1`940 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | low | above average | |
| Volvo S40 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Alfa Romeo 156 has serious deffects in 55 percent more cases than Volvo S40, so Volvo S40 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1200 | 2200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Alfa Romeo 156 has
|
Volvo S40 has
| |