Volvo V40 2000 vs Mercedes C class 2002
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.9 Diesel | 1.8 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 102 HP | 163 HP | |
| Torque: | 215 NM | 240 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12 seconds | 9.7 seconds | |
|
Mercedes C class is a more dynamic driving. Volvo V40 engine produces 61 HP less power than Mercedes C class, whereas torque is 25 NM less than Mercedes C class. Due to the lower power, Volvo V40 reaches 100 km/h speed 2.3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.4 | 9.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.2 l/100km | 10.0 l/100km | |
|
The Volvo V40 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volvo V40 consumes 3.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mercedes C class, which means that by driving the Volvo V40 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 570 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volvo V40 consumes 3.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mercedes C class. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 62 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1110 km in combined cycle | 670 km in combined cycle | |
| 1420 km on highway | 880 km on highway | ||
| 960 km with real consumption | 620 km with real consumption | ||
| Volvo V40 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
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 (Mercedes C class) 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 | 4.54 m | |
| Width: | 1.72 m | 1.73 m | |
| Height: | 1.41 m | 1.46 m | |
|
Volvo V40 is smaller. Volvo V40 is 6 cm shorter than the Mercedes C class, 1 cm narrower, while the height of Volvo V40 is 5 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 413 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1420 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volvo V40 is 0.2 metres less than that of the Mercedes C class. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`800 | 1`500 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | below average | |
| Mercedes C class has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Volvo V40 has serious deffects in 10 percent more cases than Mercedes C class, so Mercedes C class quality is probably slightly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 1600 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.4/10 | 7.6/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo V40 has
|
Mercedes C klase has
| |