Volvo V40 1999 vs Citroen Berlingo 2000
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 109 HP | 108 HP | |
| Torque: | 145 NM | 147 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12 seconds | 11.2 seconds | |
|
Citroen Berlingo is a more dynamic driving. Volvo V40 engine produces 1 HP more power than Citroen Berlingo, but torque is 2 NM less than Citroen Berlingo. Despite the higher power, Volvo V40 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.8 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.0 | 7.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.4 l/100km | 8.1 l/100km | |
|
The Citroen Berlingo is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volvo V40 consumes 0.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Citroen Berlingo, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Volvo V40 could require 90 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volvo V40 consumes 0.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Citroen Berlingo. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 750 km in combined cycle | 740 km in combined cycle | |
| 960 km on highway | 880 km on highway | ||
| 710 km with real consumption | 670 km with real consumption | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 15 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Volvo S40 | Installed on at least 10 other car models, including Peugeot 307, Citroen Xsara, Citroen C3, Peugeot 206, Peugeot 207 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Citroen Berlingo might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Citroen Berlingo 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. | |||
| Citroen Berlingo 2000 1.6 engine: Relatively reliable engine, the main problems tend to be with the engine control electronics. The engine is demanding on fuel quality and fuel consumption is relatively high. It is highly recommended to ... More about Citroen Berlingo 2000 1.6 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.48 m | 4.11 m | |
| Width: | 1.72 m | 1.72 m | |
| Height: | 1.41 m | 1.80 m | |
| Volvo V40 is 37 cm longer than the Citroen Berlingo, width is practically the same , while the height of Volvo V40 is 39 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 471 litres | 624 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1421 litres | 2800 litres | |
|
Citroen Berlingo has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Volvo V40 has 153 litres less trunk space than the Citroen Berlingo. This could mean that the Volvo V40 uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Citroen Berlingo (by 1379 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 11.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volvo V40 is 0.6 metres less than that of the Citroen Berlingo, which means Volvo V40 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`770 | 1`780 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | below average | low | |
| Volvo V40 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Citroen Berlingo has serious deffects in 15 percent more cases than Volvo V40, so Volvo V40 quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 600 | 1200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo V40 has
|
Citroen Berlingo has
| |