Volvo S40 1995 vs Mitsubishi Carisma 2000
| Body: | Sedan | Hatchback | |
|---|---|---|---|
| The hatchback generally has more luggage space thanks to a larger trunk door opening and the ability to convert the rear of the passenger compartment into luggage space. Sedans tend to be quieter than hatchbacks, due to a more isolated rear area. | |||
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 105 HP | 100 HP | |
| Torque: | 143 NM | 137 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13 seconds | 15 seconds | |
|
Volvo S40 is more dynamic to drive. Volvo S40 engine produces 5 HP more power than Mitsubishi Carisma, whereas torque is 6 NM more than Mitsubishi Carisma. Thanks to more power Volvo S40 reaches 100 km/h speed 2 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.5 | 8.3 | |
| Volvo S40 consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Carisma, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Volvo S40 could require 30 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 700 km in combined cycle | 720 km in combined cycle | |
| 900 km on highway | 950 km on highway | ||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.48 m | 4.48 m | |
| Width: | 1.72 m | 1.71 m | |
| Height: | 1.41 m | 1.40 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Volvo S40 and Mitsubishi Carisma are practically the same length. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 415 litres | 430 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
853 litres | 1150 litres | |
| Volvo S40 has 15 litres less trunk space than the Mitsubishi Carisma. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mitsubishi Carisma (by 297 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volvo S40 is 0.6 metres more than that of the Mitsubishi Carisma, which means Volvo S40 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`750 | 1`715 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | below average | average | |
| Mitsubishi Carisma has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Volvo S40 has serious deffects in 200 percent more cases than Mitsubishi Carisma, so Mitsubishi Carisma quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 600 | 1000 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.1/10 | 7.9/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo S40 has
|
Mitsubishi Carisma has
| |