Volvo V40 1999 vs Opel Omega 1994
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.9 Diesel | 2.5 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 95 HP | 130 HP | |
| Torque: | 190 NM | 250 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.5 seconds | 13 seconds | |
| Volvo V40 engine produces 35 HP less power than Opel Omega, whereas torque is 60 NM less than Opel Omega. Despite less power, Volvo V40 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.5 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.6 | 7.7 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.0 l/100km | 8.3 l/100km | |
|
The Volvo V40 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volvo V40 consumes 2.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Opel Omega, which means that by driving the Volvo V40 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 315 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volvo V40 consumes 2.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Opel Omega. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 75 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1070 km in combined cycle | 970 km in combined cycle | |
| 1300 km on highway | 1170 km on highway | ||
| 1000 km with real consumption | 900 km with real consumption | ||
| Volvo V40 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Volvo V40) have better traction on slippery roads and when climbing hills, better fuel economy, and are less expensive to purchase. On the disadvantage side, FWD cars usually have less towing capacity, poorer acceleration and harder handling. Rear-wheel drive cars (Opel Omega) have better handling on dry roads, better acceleration, more even weight distribution and more fun to drive. RWD is also better for towing large loads. The cons of rear-wheel drive are less interior and trunk space and more difficulty maneuvering in wet and snowy conditions. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.48 m | 4.82 m | |
| Width: | 1.72 m | 1.79 m | |
| Height: | 1.41 m | 1.50 m | |
|
Volvo V40 is smaller. Volvo V40 is 34 cm shorter than the Opel Omega, 7 cm narrower, while the height of Volvo V40 is 9 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 540 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1800 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volvo V40 is 0.4 metres less than that of the Opel Omega, which means Volvo V40 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 2`280 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | below average | below average | |
| Average price (€): | 800 | 600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo V40 has
|
Opel Omega has
| |