Volvo V40 2016 vs Nissan Pulsar 2014
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 1.5 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 110 HP | |
| Torque: | 320 NM | 260 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.4 seconds | 11.5 seconds | |
|
Volvo V40 is more dynamic to drive. Volvo V40 engine produces 40 HP more power than Nissan Pulsar, whereas torque is 60 NM more than Nissan Pulsar. Thanks to more power Volvo V40 reaches 100 km/h speed 3.1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 3.6 | 3.6 | |
| Fuel tank capacity: | 62 litres | 46 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1720 km in combined cycle | 1270 km in combined cycle | |
| 1820 km on highway | 1390 km on highway | ||
| 1140 km with real consumption | 900 km with real consumption | ||
| Volvo V40 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Nissan Pulsar 2014 1.5 engine: The engine has many modifications, is sufficiently common and spare parts are available. The fuel consumption/power ratio is good. The fuel injection system can be a problem and the timing belt change interval ... More about Nissan Pulsar 2014 1.5 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.37 m | 4.39 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.77 m | |
| Height: | 1.44 m | 1.52 m | |
| Volvo V40 is 2 cm shorter than the Nissan Pulsar, 3 cm wider, while the height of Volvo V40 is 8 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 335 litres | 385 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1500 litres | 1395 litres | |
| Volvo V40 has 50 litres less trunk space than the Nissan Pulsar. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Volvo V40 (by 105 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | 10.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volvo V40 is 0.6 metres more than that of the Nissan Pulsar, which means Volvo V40 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`980 | 1`785 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | average | |
| Volvo V40 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Nissan Pulsar has serious deffects in 15 percent more cases than Volvo V40, so Volvo V40 quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 13 000 | 7200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo V40 has
|
Nissan Pulsar has
| |