Volvo S40 2002 vs Mitsubishi Lancer 2004
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.9 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 165 HP | 98 HP | |
| Torque: | 240 NM | 150 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.5 seconds | 11.8 seconds | |
|
Volvo S40 is more dynamic to drive. Volvo S40 engine produces 67 HP more power than Mitsubishi Lancer, whereas torque is 90 NM more than Mitsubishi Lancer. Thanks to more power Volvo S40 reaches 100 km/h speed 3.3 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.9 | 6.7 | |
|
The Mitsubishi Lancer is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Volvo S40 consumes 1.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Lancer, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Volvo S40 could require 180 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 50 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 750 km in combined cycle | 740 km in combined cycle | |
| 980 km on highway | 900 km on highway | ||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.48 m | 4.48 m | |
| Width: | 1.72 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.41 m | 1.45 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Volvo S40 and Mitsubishi Lancer are practically the same length. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 471 litres | 430 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
853 litres | no data | |
|
Volvo S40 has more luggage capacity. Volvo S40 has 41 litres more trunk space than the Mitsubishi Lancer. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | no data | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`780 | 1`750 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 1200 | 1200 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.0/10 | 8.7/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo S40 has
|
Mitsubishi Lancer has
| |