Volvo V40 · Facelift 2016
Car comparison
Volvo V40 · Facelift 2016 1.5 T3vsVolvo V40 2.0 D4
Compare specs, acceleration, fuel consumption, dimensions, practicality, and estimated running costs side by side.
New comparisonVolvo V40
2.0 D4
Comparison overview
Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.
Best choices
Volvo V40 2.0 D4
- Most powerful177 hp132 kW
- Highest torque400 Nm295 lb-ft
- Lightest1,398 kg3,082 lb
- Best power-to-weight127 hp/t94 kW/t7.9 kg/hp
- Lowest combined fuel consumption5.2 L/100 km45.2 mpg US54.3 mpg UK
- Lowest city consumption6.9 L/100 km34.1 mpg US40.9 mpg UK
- Lowest highway consumption4.3 L/100 km54.7 mpg US65.7 mpg UK
- Best estimated range1,154 km717 mi
- Largest trunk496 L
- Best overall score58/100
- Best performance score49/100
- Best economy score93/100
- Best practicality score78/100
Volvo V40 Facelift 2016 1.5 T3
- Quickest 0-100 km/h8.3 s
- Fastest top speed220 km/h137 mph Unrestricted210 km/h130 mph Restricted
- Lowest CO2 emissions136 g/km
Specification comparison
| Model | VolvoV40Facelift 20161.5 T3 | VolvoV402.0 D4 |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 152hp113kW | 177hp132kW |
| Torque | 250Nm184lb-ft | 400Nm295lb-ft |
| Curb weight | 1,531kg3,375lb | 1,398kg3,082lb |
| Gross weight | - | 2,040kg4,497lb |
| Top speed | Unrestricted 220 km/h137 mph Restricted 210 km/h130 mph Calculated | 215 km/h 134 mph |
| To 99% top speed | 90.1s99% target: 218 km/h / 135 mph Calculated | 84.3s99% target: 213 km/h / 132 mph Calculated |
| 0-100 km/h | 8.3s | 8.3s |
| 0-200 km/h | 41.9s Calculated | 44.6s Calculated |
| 0-60 mph | 7.9s Calculated | 7.9s Calculated |
| Fuel consumption | 5.9L/100 km39.9mpg US47.9mpg UK | 5.2L/100 km45.2mpg US54.3mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption city | 7.1L/100 km33.1mpg US39.8mpg UK | 6.9L/100 km34.1mpg US40.9mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption highway | 5.1L/100 km46.1mpg US55.4mpg UK | 4.3L/100 km54.7mpg US65.7mpg UK |
| Quarter mile | 16.0s Calculated | 16.0s Calculated |
| Power-to-weight | 99hp/t74kW/t45hp/1000 lb Calculated | 127hp/t94kW/t57hp/1000 lb Calculated |
| Torque-to-weight | 163Nm/t109lb-ft/ton Calculated | 286Nm/t191lb-ft/ton Calculated |
| Estimated range | 1,051km653mi Calculated | 1,154km717mi Calculated |
| Displacement | 1,498cc91cu in | 1,984cc121cu in |
| Length | 4,370mm172in | 4,369mm172in |
| Width | 1,783mm70in | 1,802mm71in |
| Height | 1,439mm57in | 1,445mm57in |
| Wheelbase | 2,647mm104in | 2,647mm104in |
| Front track | 1,559mm61in | 1,546mm61in |
| Rear track | 1,546mm61in | 1,536mm60in |
| Trunk volume | 324L | 496L |
| Doors | 5 | 5 |
| Seats | 5 | 5 |
| Fuel tank | 62L | 60L |
| CO2 emissions | 136g/km | 136g/km |
Performance charts
Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.
Dyno simulation
Estimated stock-style power and torque curves by engine speed.
- Volvo V40 Facelift 2016 1.5 T3: Power / Torque
- Volvo V40 2.0 D4: Power / Torque
| Vehicle | Peak power RPM | Peak torque RPM | Max engine speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| VolvoV40Facelift 20161.5 T3 | 5,000 rpm | 1,800-4,020 rpm | 6,000 rpm |
| VolvoV402.0 D4 | 3,500 rpm | 1,750-2,750 rpm | 3,750 rpm |
Acceleration curve
Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.
| Metric | VolvoV40Facelift 20161.5 T3 | VolvoV402.0 D4 |
|---|---|---|
| Acceleration checkpoints | ||
0-60 mph 0-97 km/h | 7.9 s | 7.9 s |
0-100 km/h 0-62 mph | 8.3 s | 8.3 s |
0-200 km/h 0-124 mph | 41.9 s | 44.6 s |
| Top speed | Unrestricted 220 km/h137 mph Restricted 210 km/h130 mph Likely limited | 215 km/h 134 mph |
| Drag race simulation | ||
60 ft 18 m | 2.6 s | 2.6 s |
330 ft 101 m | 6.9 s | 7.0 s |
1/8 mile 201 m | 10.5 s | 10.5 s |
1000 ft 305 m | 13.5 s | 13.5 s |
1/4 mile 402 m | 16.0 s | 16.0 s |
Trap speed 1/4 mile 402 m | 144 km/h 89 mph | 144 km/h 89 mph |
Power comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power. Higher is better · hp / kW
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolvoV40Facelift 20161.5 T3 | 152 hp 113 kW |
| VolvoV402.0 D4 | 177 hp 132 kW |
Volvo V40 2.0 D4 has 25 hp more than Volvo V40 Facelift 2016 1.5 T3.
The biggest power difference is between Volvo V40 Facelift 2016 1.5 T3 and Volvo V40 2.0 D4: 25 hp (19 kW).
Torque comparison
Bar comparison chart for Torque. Higher is better · Nm / lb-ft
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolvoV40Facelift 20161.5 T3 | 250 Nm 184 lb-ft |
| VolvoV402.0 D4 | 400 Nm 295 lb-ft |
Curb weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Curb weight. Lower is better · kg / lb
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolvoV40Facelift 20161.5 T3 | 1,531 kg 3,375 lb |
| VolvoV402.0 D4 | 1,398 kg 3,082 lb |
Top speed without limiter comparison
Bar comparison chart for Top speed without limiter. Higher is better · km/h / mph
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolvoV40Facelift 20161.5 T3 | Unrestricted 220 km/h137 mph Restricted 210 km/h130 mph |
| VolvoV402.0 D4 | 215 km/h 134 mph |
0-100 km/h comparison
Bar comparison chart for 0-100 km/h. Lower is better · seconds
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolvoV40Facelift 20161.5 T3 | 8.3 s |
| VolvoV402.0 D4 | 8.3 s |
Although Volvo V40 2.0 D4 has more power, Volvo V40 Facelift 2016 1.5 T3 is quicker from 0-100 km/h.
Fuel consumption comparison
Bar comparison chart for Fuel consumption. Lower is better · L/100 km / mpg US / mpg UK
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolvoV40Facelift 20161.5 T3 | 5.9 L/100 km 39.9 mpg US 47.9 mpg UK |
| VolvoV402.0 D4 | 5.2 L/100 km 45.2 mpg US 54.3 mpg UK |
The biggest fuel consumption difference is between Volvo V40 2.0 D4 and Volvo V40 Facelift 2016 1.5 T3: 0.7 L/100 km.
Power-to-weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power-to-weight. Higher is better · hp/t / kW/t
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolvoV40Facelift 20161.5 T3 | 99 hp/t 74 kW/t 10.1 kg/hp |
| VolvoV402.0 D4 | 127 hp/t 94 kW/t 7.9 kg/hp |
Estimated range comparison
Bar comparison chart for Estimated range. Higher is better · km / mi
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolvoV40Facelift 20161.5 T3 | 1,051 km 653 mi |
| VolvoV402.0 D4 | 1,154 km 717 mi |
Performance spider chart
Radar chart comparing normalized performance and fuel-consumption scores.
| Vehicle | Power | Acceleration | Top speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| VolvoV40Facelift 20161.5 T3 | 152 hp 113 kW | 8.3 s | Unrestricted 220 km/h137 mph Restricted 210 km/h130 mph |
| VolvoV402.0 D4 | 177 hp 132 kW | 8.3 s | 215 km/h 134 mph |
Most attractive quadrant
Scatter chart with performance score on the X axis and practicality score on the Y axis.
| Vehicle | Performance score | Practicality score | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| VolvoV40Facelift 20161.5 T3 |
|
| ||||||||||||||
| VolvoV402.0 D4 |
|
| ||||||||||||||
Performance vs fuel economy
Cars closer to the top-right corner combine stronger performance with better fuel economy scores.
| Vehicle | Performance score | Fuel economy score | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| VolvoV40Facelift 20161.5 T3 |
| 5.9 L/100 km 39.9 mpg US 47.9 mpg UK | ||||||
| VolvoV402.0 D4 |
| 5.2 L/100 km 45.2 mpg US 54.3 mpg UK | ||||||
Volvo V40 2.0 D4 is closest to the top-right balance target for performance and fuel economy.
Acceleration vs fuel consumption
Cars closer to the lower-left corner offer a better mix of quick acceleration and low fuel consumption.
| Vehicle | Fuel consumption, L/100 km | 0-100 km/h, s |
|---|---|---|
| VolvoV40Facelift 20161.5 T3 | 5.9 L/100 km 39.9 mpg US 47.9 mpg UK | 8.3 s |
| VolvoV402.0 D4 | 5.2 L/100 km 45.2 mpg US 54.3 mpg UK | 8.3 s |
Power-to-weight vs fuel consumption
The shaded area favors higher power-to-weight with lower combined fuel consumption.
| Vehicle | Power-to-weight, hp/t | Fuel consumption, L/100 km |
|---|---|---|
| VolvoV40Facelift 20161.5 T3 | 99 hp/t 74 kW/t 10.1 kg/hp | 5.9 L/100 km 39.9 mpg US 47.9 mpg UK |
| VolvoV402.0 D4 | 127 hp/t 94 kW/t 7.9 kg/hp | 5.2 L/100 km 45.2 mpg US 54.3 mpg UK |
Detailed score breakdown
| Vehicle | VolvoV40Facelift 20161.5 T3 | VolvoV402.0 D4 | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power | 152 hp 113 kW | 177 hp 132 kW | ||||||||||||||||
| Torque | 250 Nm 184 lb-ft | 400 Nm 295 lb-ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Acceleration | 8.3 s | 8.3 s | ||||||||||||||||
| Top speed | Unrestricted 220 km/h137 mph Restricted 210 km/h130 mph | 215 km/h 134 mph | ||||||||||||||||
| Lightness | 1,531 kg 3,375 lb | 1,398 kg 3,082 lb | ||||||||||||||||
| Fuel consumption | 5.9 L/100 km 39.9 mpg US 47.9 mpg UK | 5.2 L/100 km 45.2 mpg US 54.3 mpg UK | ||||||||||||||||
| Practicality |
|
| ||||||||||||||||
| Range score | 1,051 km 653 mi | 1,154 km 717 mi | ||||||||||||||||
| CO2 score | 136 g/km | 136 g/km | ||||||||||||||||
| Trunk score | 324 L 11.4 cu ft | 496 L 17.5 cu ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Power-to-weight score | 99 hp/t 74 kW/t 10.1 kg/hp | 127 hp/t 94 kW/t 7.9 kg/hp | ||||||||||||||||
| Overall | Fixed score | Fixed score |
Fuel cost and annual usage
Estimate running costs from combined consumption, your annual distance, and the fuel price in your local currency.
Enter the fuel price in your local currency, for example €/L, $/gal, £/L or any other local currency.
LC = Local Currency
| Vehicle | Volvo V40 Facelift 2016 1.5 T3 | Volvo V40 2.0 D4 |
|---|---|---|
| Consumption | 5.9 L/100 km39.9 mpg US47.9 mpg UK | 5.2 L/100 km45.2 mpg US54.3 mpg UK |
| Cost / 100 km | 10.33 LC100 km | 9.10 LC100 km |
| Cost / 100 mi | 16.62 LC100 mi | 14.65 LC100 mi |
| Annual fuel used | 885 L234 US gal195 UK gal | 780 L206 US gal172 UK gal |
| Annual fuel cost | 1,549 LC/year | 1,365 LC/year |
Head-to-head comparisons
Volvo V40 Facelift 2016 1.5 T3
- Has 5 km/h (3 mph) higher top speed
Pros
- Quickest 0-100 km/h in this comparison
- Highest top speed
Cons
- Lowest power
- Highest combined fuel consumption
- Heaviest
- Smallest trunk
- Highest CO2 emissions
Volvo V40 2.0 D4
- Has 25 hp more
- Has 150 Nm more
- Is 133 kg lighter
- Uses 0.7 L/100 km less fuel
- Has 27 hp/t better power-to-weight
- Has 103 km (64 mi) more estimated range
- Has 172 L more trunk volume
Pros
- Most powerful
- Highest torque
- Lightest
- Lowest combined fuel consumption
- Best power-to-weight ratio
- Best estimated range
- Largest trunk
Cons
- Lowest top speed
Choose cars to compare
Popular comparisons























