Volvo V40 2016 vs Mazda 3 2016
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 122 HP | 120 HP | |
| Torque: | 220 NM | 210 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.4 seconds | 8.9 seconds | |
| Volvo V40 engine produces 2 HP more power than Mazda 3, whereas torque is 10 NM more than Mazda 3. Despite the higher power, Volvo V40 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.5 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.4 | 5.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.1 l/100km | 6.6 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 3 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volvo V40 consumes 0.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Volvo V40 could require 45 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volvo V40 consumes 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 62 litres | 51 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1140 km in combined cycle | 1000 km in combined cycle | |
| 1400 km on highway | 1180 km on highway | ||
| 870 km with real consumption | 770 km with real consumption | ||
| Volvo V40 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.37 m | 4.47 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.44 m | 1.45 m | |
| Volvo V40 is 10 cm shorter than the Mazda 3, width is practically the same , while the height of Volvo V40 is 1 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 335 litres | 364 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1500 litres | 1263 litres | |
| Volvo V40 has 29 litres less trunk space than the Mazda 3. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Volvo V40 (by 237 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volvo V40 is 0.2 metres more than that of the Mazda 3. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`965 | 1`815 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | above average | low | |
| Volvo V40 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mazda 3 has serious deffects in 60 percent more cases than Volvo V40, so Volvo V40 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 13 200 | 10 400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo V40 has
|
Mazda 3 has
| |