Volvo S40 2004 vs Mitsubishi Lancer 2004
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Diesel (Volvo S40) engines typically outperform gasoline engines in terms of fuel efficiency and low-end torque. This makes them more economical and better suited for towing or long-distance travel. However, gasoline (Mitsubishi Lancer) engines mostly are lighter, quieter, and offer better acceleration and responsiveness, especially in smaller vehicles. For more information, see the article "Diesel or Petrol: Fuel Economy and Key Differences." | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 136 HP | 98 HP | |
| Torque: | 340 NM | 150 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.5 seconds | 11.8 seconds | |
|
Volvo S40 is more dynamic to drive. Volvo S40 engine produces 38 HP more power than Mitsubishi Lancer, whereas torque is 190 NM more than Mitsubishi Lancer. Thanks to more power Volvo S40 reaches 100 km/h speed 2.3 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.6 | 6.7 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.1 l/100km | 7.3 l/100km | |
|
The Volvo S40 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volvo S40 consumes 1.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Lancer, which means that by driving the Volvo S40 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 165 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volvo S40 consumes 1.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Lancer. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 50 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 980 km in combined cycle | 740 km in combined cycle | |
| 1220 km on highway | 900 km on highway | ||
| 900 km with real consumption | 680 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: | 4.47 m | 4.48 m | |
| Width: | 1.77 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.45 m | 1.45 m | |
| Volvo S40 is 1 cm shorter than the Mitsubishi Lancer, 8 cm wider the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 404 litres | 430 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
883 litres | no data | |
|
Mitsubishi Lancer has more luggage space. Volvo S40 has 26 litres less trunk space than the Mitsubishi Lancer. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | no data | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`940 | 1`750 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 2400 | 1200 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.6/10 | 8.7/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo S40 has
|
Mitsubishi Lancer has
| |