Volvo V40 2012 vs Nissan Pulsar 2014
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Diesel | 1.5 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 115 HP | 110 HP | |
| Torque: | 270 NM | 260 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.3 seconds | 11.5 seconds | |
| Volvo V40 engine produces 5 HP more power than Nissan Pulsar, whereas torque is 10 NM more than Nissan Pulsar. Despite the higher power, Volvo V40 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.8 seconds later. | |||
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 | ||
| 1240 km with real consumption | 900 km with real consumption | ||
| Volvo V40 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Ground clearance: | 133 mm (5.2 inches) | 156 mm (6.1 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Nissan Pulsar can perform better on bad roads - it can go over higher obstacles and bumps. At the same time, the higher ground clearance can reduce stability and handling on paved roads, especially at higher speeds. Note, however, that this Nissan Pulsar version does not have 4x4 drive, which is very important in poor road conditions. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Volvo V70, Volvo S80, Volvo S60, Volvo V60 | Installed on at least 22 other car models, including Nissan Qashqai, Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Dacia Duster, Nissan Juke | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Nissan Pulsar might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Volvo V40 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. | |||
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 |
no data | 1395 litres | |
|
Nissan Pulsar has more luggage space. Volvo V40 has 50 litres less trunk space than the Nissan Pulsar. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.2 meters | 10.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volvo V40 is 1 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`890 | 1`785 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Volvo V40 scores higher in safety tests, but Nissan Pulsar 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: | above average | below average | |
| Volvo V40 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Nissan Pulsar has serious deffects in 45 percent more cases than Volvo V40, so Volvo V40 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 9000 | 7600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo V40 has
|
Nissan Pulsar has
| |