Toyota Corolla 2002 vs Volvo V40 2002
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 1.9 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 90 HP | 115 HP | |
| Torque: | 215 NM | 265 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.6 seconds | 10.5 seconds | |
|
Volvo V40 is a more dynamic driving. Toyota Corolla engine produces 25 HP less power than Volvo V40, whereas torque is 50 NM less than Volvo V40. Due to the lower power, Toyota Corolla reaches 100 km/h speed 2.1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.9 | 5.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.1 l/100km | 6.0 l/100km | |
|
The Volvo V40 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Toyota Corolla consumes 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo V40, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Toyota Corolla could require 75 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Toyota Corolla consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo V40. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 930 km in combined cycle | 1110 km in combined cycle | |
| 1100 km on highway | 1390 km on highway | ||
| 900 km with real consumption | 1000 km with real consumption | ||
| Volvo V40 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 280'000 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: | 8 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Toyota Avensis, Toyota RAV4, Toyota Corolla Verso | Installed on at least 11 other car models, including Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Volvo S40, Mitsubishi Carisma | |
| 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. | |||
| Toyota Corolla 2002 2.0 engine: The engine was known for its solid technical characteristics.
One of its drawbacks is the lack of hydraulic lifters, requiring periodic valve clearance adjustments. The next-generation 1AD-FTV engine was equipped with ... More about Toyota Corolla 2002 2.0 engine Volvo V40 2002 1.9 engine: Long-lasting and fuel-efficient engine. Maintaining oil change and maintenance intervals is essential for a long engine life, as poor or untimely oil changes can result in turbine and oil pump damage, followed ... More about Volvo V40 2002 1.9 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.38 m | 4.48 m | |
| Width: | 1.71 m | 1.72 m | |
| Height: | 1.50 m | 1.41 m | |
|
Toyota Corolla is smaller, but higher. Toyota Corolla is 10 cm shorter than the Volvo V40, 1 cm narrower, while the height of Toyota Corolla is 9 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 413 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1420 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.2 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Toyota Corolla is 0.4 metres less than that of the Volvo V40, which means Toyota Corolla can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`300 | 1`800 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | high | above average | |
| Toyota Corolla has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Volvo V40 has serious deffects in 45 percent more cases than Toyota Corolla, so Toyota Corolla quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1200 | 1000 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.2/10 | 8.4/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Toyota Corolla has
|
Volvo V40 has
| |