Ford Mondeo 2003 vs Volvo V40 2002
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.8 Petrol | 1.8 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 130 HP | 122 HP | |
| Torque: | 175 NM | 170 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.7 seconds | 10.5 seconds | |
| Ford Mondeo engine produces 8 HP more power than Volvo V40, whereas torque is 5 NM more than Volvo V40. Despite the higher power, Ford Mondeo reaches 100 km/h speed 0.2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.4 | 7.7 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.7 l/100km | 8.2 l/100km | |
|
The Volvo V40 is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Ford Mondeo consumes 0.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo V40, which means that by driving the Ford Mondeo over 15,000 km in a year you can save 45 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Ford Mondeo consumes 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo V40. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 59 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 790 km in combined cycle | 770 km in combined cycle | |
| 1000 km on highway | 1000 km on highway | ||
| 670 km with real consumption | 730 km with real consumption | ||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 350'000 km | 420'000 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 V40 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 4 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Used also on Volvo S40 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Volvo V40 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.80 m | 4.48 m | |
| Width: | 1.81 m | 1.72 m | |
| Height: | 1.44 m | 1.41 m | |
|
Ford Mondeo is larger. Ford Mondeo is 32 cm longer than the Volvo V40, 9 cm wider, while the height of Ford Mondeo is 3 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 540 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1700 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.1 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Ford Mondeo is 0.5 metres more than that of the Volvo V40, which means Ford Mondeo can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | average | above average | |
| Volvo V40 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Ford Mondeo has serious deffects in 25 percent more cases than Volvo V40, so Volvo V40 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 1400 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.5/10 | 8.4/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Mondeo has
|
Volvo V40 has
| |