Mazda 626 1998 vs Volvo V40 2002
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 1.9 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 115 HP | 136 HP | |
| Torque: | 170 NM | 190 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.5 seconds | 10.7 seconds | |
|
Volvo V40 is a more dynamic driving. Mazda 626 engine produces 21 HP less power than Volvo V40, whereas torque is 20 NM less than Volvo V40. Due to the lower power, Mazda 626 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.8 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.7 | 8.9 | |
| Mazda 626 consumes 0.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo V40, which means that by driving the Mazda 626 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 30 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 64 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 730 km in combined cycle | 670 km in combined cycle | |
| 920 km on highway | 900 km on highway | ||
| Mazda 626 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.66 m | 4.48 m | |
| Width: | 1.71 m | 1.72 m | |
| Height: | 1.52 m | 1.41 m | |
| Mazda 626 is 18 cm longer than the Volvo V40, 1 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda 626 is 11 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 413 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1677 litres | 1421 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 626 is 0.2 metres more than that of the Volvo V40. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`800 | 1`740 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | Volvo V40 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mazda 626 has serious deffects in 45 percent more cases than Volvo V40, so Volvo V40 quality is probably significantly better | ||
| Average price (€): | 800 | 1000 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.2/10 | 8.4/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 626 has
|
Volvo V40 has
| |