Volvo S40 2000 vs Volkswagen Bora 2001
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.9 Petrol | 1.8 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain and belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 200 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 300 NM | 210 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8 seconds | 9.8 seconds | |
|
Volvo S40 is more dynamic to drive. Volvo S40 engine produces 50 HP more power than Volkswagen Bora, whereas torque is 90 NM more than Volkswagen Bora. Thanks to more power Volvo S40 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.8 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.5 | 8.9 | |
|
The Volkswagen Bora is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Volvo S40 consumes 0.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Bora, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Volvo S40 could require 90 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 630 km in combined cycle | 610 km in combined cycle | |
| 880 km on highway | 800 km on highway | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 350'000 km | 440'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Volkswagen Bora engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 3 years | 9 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Volvo V40 | Installed on at least 9 other car models, including Volkswagen Passat, Volkswagen Golf, Audi A4, Skoda Octavia, Audi A3 | |
| 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. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Volkswagen Bora 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. | |||
| Volkswagen Bora 2001 1.8 engine: The weakest link in this engine is the turbine, whose failure is contributed to by a faulty catalytic converter. The oil pump and chain tensioner also tend to have problems. | |||
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 | 455 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
853 litres | 785 litres | |
| Volvo S40 has 16 litres more trunk space than the Volkswagen Bora. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Volvo S40 (by 68 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 11 meters | |
| Gross weight: | 1`780 kg | 1`820 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`310 kg | 1`298 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 470 kg | 522 kg | |
| Volvo S40 load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 11 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
| |