Volvo S40 2000 vs Volkswagen Vento 1992
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.8 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 109 HP | 90 HP | |
| Torque: | 145 NM | 145 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12 seconds | 12.7 seconds | |
|
Volvo S40 is more dynamic to drive. Volvo S40 engine produces 19 HP more power than Volkswagen Vento, the torque is the same for both cars. Thanks to more power Volvo S40 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.7 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.9 | 8.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.1 l/100km | 7.7 l/100km | |
|
The Volkswagen Vento is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Volvo S40 consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Vento, which means that by driving the Volvo S40 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 15 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Volvo S40 consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Vento. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 750 km in combined cycle | 680 km in combined cycle | |
| 1000 km on highway | 880 km on highway | ||
| 740 km with real consumption | 710 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. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 440'000 km | 420'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Volvo V40 | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Volkswagen Golf, Seat Toledo, Seat Ibiza, Seat Cordoba | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Volkswagen Vento might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Volkswagen Vento engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.48 m | 4.38 m | |
| Width: | 1.72 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.41 m | 1.42 m | |
|
Volvo S40 is larger, but slightly lower. Volvo S40 is 10 cm longer than the Volkswagen Vento, 2 cm wider, while the height of Volvo S40 is 1 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 471 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
853 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 10.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volvo S40 is 0.3 metres more than that of the Volkswagen Vento. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`750 | 1`200 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 800 | 1000 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.0/10 | 6.3/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo S40 has
|
Volkswagen Vento has
| |