Volvo V40 1999 vs Volvo V50 2004
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.8 Petrol | 1.8 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 122 HP | 125 HP | |
| Torque: | 170 NM | 165 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.5 seconds | 11 seconds | |
|
Volvo V40 is more dynamic to drive. Volvo V40 engine produces 3 HP less power than Volvo V50, but torque is 5 NM more than Volvo V50. Despite less power, Volvo V40 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.5 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.2 | 7.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.5 l/100km | 8.0 l/100km | |
|
The Volvo V50 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volvo V40 consumes 0.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo V50, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Volvo V40 could require 135 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 Volvo V50. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 62 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 730 km in combined cycle | 840 km in combined cycle | |
| 950 km on highway | 1060 km on highway | ||
| 700 km with real consumption | 770 km with real consumption | ||
| Volvo V50 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 460'000 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 V50 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Volvo S40 | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Volvo S40, Volvo C30 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Volvo V50 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.48 m | 4.51 m | |
| Width: | 1.72 m | 1.77 m | |
| Height: | 1.41 m | 1.45 m | |
|
Volvo V40 is smaller. Volvo V40 is 3 cm shorter than the Volvo V50, 5 cm narrower, while the height of Volvo V40 is 4 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 417 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1307 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 1`890 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | below average | above average | |
| Volvo V50 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Volvo V40 has serious deffects in 235 percent more cases than Volvo V50, so Volvo V50 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 600 | 2000 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 6.4/10 | 6.4/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo V40 has
|
Volvo V50 has
| |