Volkswagen Polo 1996 vs Volvo S40 2000

 
Volkswagen Polo
1996 - 1999
Volvo S40
2000 - 2002
Gearbox: ManualManual
Engine: 1.9 Diesel1.9 Diesel

Performance

Power: 64 HP102 HP
Torque: 125 NM215 NM
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: 16.9 seconds12 seconds
Volvo S40 is a more dynamic driving.
Volkswagen Polo engine produces 38 HP less power than Volvo S40, whereas torque is 90 NM less than Volvo S40. Due to the lower power, Volkswagen Polo reaches 100 km/h speed 4.9 seconds later.

Fuel consumption

Fuel consumption (l/100km): 5.05.4
Real fuel consumption: 4.9 l/100km5.3 l/100km
The Volkswagen Polo is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy.
By specification Volkswagen Polo consumes 0.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo S40, which means that by driving the Volkswagen Polo over 15,000 km in a year you can save 60 litres of fuel.
By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volkswagen Polo consumes 0.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo S40.
Fuel tank capacity: 45 litres60 litres
Full fuel tank distance: 900 km in combined cycle1110 km in combined cycle
1120 km on highway1420 km on highway
910 km with real consumption1130 km with real consumption
Volvo S40 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: 4.14 m4.48 m
Width: 1.64 m1.72 m
Height: 1.41 m1.41 m
Volkswagen Polo is smaller.
Volkswagen Polo is 34 cm shorter than the Volvo S40, 8 cm narrower the height of the cars does not differ significantly.
Trunk capacity: 455 litres471 litres
Trunk max capacity:
with rear seats folded down
762 litres853 litres
Volkswagen Polo has 16 litres less trunk space than the Volvo S40. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Volvo S40 (by 91 litres).
Turning diameter: 10.9 meters11 meters
The turning circle of the Volkswagen Polo is 0.1 metres less than that of the Volvo S40.
Gross weight (kg): 1`5001`770
Safety: no data
Quality:
high

below average
Volkswagen Polo has fewer problems.
According to annual technical inspection data Volvo S40 has serious deffects in 55 percent more cases than Volkswagen Polo, so Volkswagen Polo quality is probably significantly better
Average price (€): 800800
Rating in user reviews: 7.2/10 7.0/10
Pros and Cons: Volkswagen Polo has
  • lower fuel consumption
  • fewer faults
  • lower price
Volvo S40 has
  • more power
  • more dynamic
  • more full fuel tank mileage
Share these results to social networks or e-mail
Contact us: info@auto-abc.lv