Volvo V40 2002 vs Alfa Romeo 156 2000
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.9 Diesel | 2.4 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 115 HP | 140 HP | |
| Torque: | 265 NM | 304 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.5 seconds | 9.8 seconds | |
|
Alfa Romeo 156 is a more dynamic driving. Volvo V40 engine produces 25 HP less power than Alfa Romeo 156, whereas torque is 39 NM less than Alfa Romeo 156. Due to the lower power, Volvo V40 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.7 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.4 | 6.8 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.0 l/100km | 6.6 l/100km | |
|
The Volvo V40 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volvo V40 consumes 1.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Alfa Romeo 156, which means that by driving the Volvo V40 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 210 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volvo V40 consumes 0.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Alfa Romeo 156. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 63 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1110 km in combined cycle | 920 km in combined cycle | |
| 1390 km on highway | 1120 km on highway | ||
| 1000 km with real consumption | 950 km with real consumption | ||
| Volvo V40 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 560'000 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 Alfa Romeo 156 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 8 years | 2 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 11 other car models, including Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Volvo S40, Mitsubishi Carisma | Used only for this car | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Volvo V40 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Volvo V40 2002 1.9 engine: Long-lasting and fuel-efficient engine. Maintaining oil change and maintenance intervals is essential for a long engine life, as poor or untimely oil changes can result in turbine and oil pump damage, followed ... More about Volvo V40 2002 1.9 engine Alfa Romeo 156 2000 2.4 engine: A simple and reliable engine, majority of problems are caused by fuel pump, electrical system and the oil pump drive chain. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.48 m | 4.43 m | |
| Width: | 1.72 m | 1.74 m | |
| Height: | 1.41 m | 1.42 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Volvo V40 is 5 cm longer than the Alfa Romeo 156, 2 cm narrower, while the height of Volvo V40 is 1 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 413 litres | 360 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1420 litres | 1180 litres | |
|
Volvo V40 has more luggage capacity. Volvo V40 has 53 litres more trunk space than the Alfa Romeo 156. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Volvo V40 (by 240 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 11.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volvo V40 is 1 metres less than that of the Alfa Romeo 156, which means Volvo V40 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`800 | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | below average | low | |
| Volvo V40 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Alfa Romeo 156 has serious deffects in 10 percent more cases than Volvo V40, so Volvo V40 quality is probably slightly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 1200 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.4/10 | 6.6/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo V40 has
|
Alfa Romeo 156 has
| |