Volvo V40 2012 vs Citroen C4 2015
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Diesel | 1.6 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 115 HP | 99 HP | |
| Torque: | 270 NM | 254 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.3 seconds | 11.5 seconds | |
| Volvo V40 engine produces 16 HP more power than Citroen C4, whereas torque is 16 NM more than Citroen C4. Despite the higher power, Volvo V40 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.8 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 3.6 | 3.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 5.0 l/100km | 4.6 l/100km | |
|
The Citroen C4 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 Citroen C4, 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 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Citroen C4. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 62 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1720 km in combined cycle | 1810 km in combined cycle | |
| 1820 km on highway | 1930 km on highway | ||
| 1240 km with real consumption | 1300 km with real consumption | ||
| Citroen C4 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: | 560'000 km | 330'000 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 Volvo V40 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 11 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 6 other car models, including Volvo V70, Volvo S80, Volvo S60, Volvo S40, Volvo V60 | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including Peugeot 308, Citroen C3, Peugeot 2008, Opel Crossland | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Citroen C4 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Volvo V40 2012 1.6 engine: The main issues reported by owners are frequent oil and coolant leaks. The Siemens fuel system with piezo injectors is highly sensitive to fuel quality, requiring the use of high-grade diesel to avoid ... More about Volvo V40 2012 1.6 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.37 m | 4.33 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.79 m | |
| Height: | 1.44 m | 1.49 m | |
|
Volvo V40 is larger, but lower. Volvo V40 is 4 cm longer than the Citroen C4, 1 cm wider, while the height of Volvo V40 is 5 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 335 litres | 408 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1183 litres | |
|
Citroen C4 has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Volvo V40 has 73 litres less trunk space than the Citroen C4. This could mean that the Volvo V40 uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.2 meters | 10.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volvo V40 is 0.5 metres more than that of the Citroen C4, which means Volvo V40 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`890 | 1`840 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Volvo V40 scores higher in safety tests, but Citroen C4 is better rated in child safety tests. The Volvo V40 scores significantly higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | high | below average | |
| Volvo V40 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Citroen C4 has serious deffects in 85 percent more cases than Volvo V40, so Volvo V40 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 7400 | 7000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo V40 has
|
Citroen C4 has
| |