Volvo S40 2000 vs Volkswagen Bora 1999
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.9 Petrol | 1.8 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain and belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 136 HP | 125 HP | |
| Torque: | 190 NM | 170 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.7 seconds | 12 seconds | |
|
Volvo S40 is more dynamic to drive. Volvo S40 engine produces 11 HP more power than Volkswagen Bora, whereas torque is 20 NM more than Volkswagen Bora. Thanks to more power Volvo S40 reaches 100 km/h speed 2.3 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.3 | 9.0 | |
|
The Volvo S40 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Volvo S40 consumes 0.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Bora, which means that by driving the Volvo S40 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 105 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 62 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 720 km in combined cycle | 680 km in combined cycle | |
| 950 km on highway | 890 km on highway | ||
| 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. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
|
Volkswagen Bora 1998: Vehicle is equipped with 4motion automatic four-wheel drive. Under normal driving conditions, the torque distribution is 90% to the front axle and 10% to the rear axle. When wheel spin is detected, the multi-plate clutch engages and torque is evenly distributed between the axles (50%/50%). | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 460'000 km | 460'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 4 years | 4 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Volvo V40 | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Audi A6, Audi A4, Volkswagen Golf, Skoda Octavia | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Volkswagen Bora might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Volkswagen Bora 1999 1.8 engine: This engine is known for its reliability and durability, often lasting over 450,000 km with proper maintenance. Regular maintenance, particularly using high-quality oil, is essential to maximize its lifespan and performance.
One of the most common issues is the failure of the vacuum regulator for the intake ... More about Volkswagen Bora 1999 1.8 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.48 m | 4.38 m | |
| Width: | 1.72 m | 1.74 m | |
| Height: | 1.41 m | 1.45 m | |
| Volvo S40 is 10 cm longer than the Volkswagen Bora, 2 cm narrower, while the height of Volvo S40 is 4 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 471 litres | 340 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
853 litres | 670 litres | |
|
Volvo S40 has more luggage capacity. Volvo S40 has 131 litres more trunk space than the Volkswagen Bora. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Volvo S40 (by 183 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 11 meters | |
| Gross weight: | 1`750 kg | 1`875 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`288 kg | 1`335 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 462 kg | 540 kg | |
| Volvo S40 load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 17 procentiem less than Volkswagen Bora. Therefore, Volkswagen Bora is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 800 | 1200 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.0/10 | 7.8/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo S40 has
|
Volkswagen Bora has
| |