Real fuel consumption and economy logo

Volvo V40 1996 fuel consumption

Volvo V40 from 1996 to 2000 real fuel consumption according to user reports is approximately 20% higher compared to advertised fuel consumption. For petrol engines real consumption is in average 16% higher, but for diesel engines is approximately 24% higher. Starting from 1996 Volvo V40 average difference between actual owner-reported fuel consumption and stated consumption was similar to average, at 1998 difference between owner-reported and advertised fuel economy became slightly above industry average. For more details, see the table below.

Year-to-year deviations of actual owner-reported average fuel consumption from advertised values

YearGasoline carsDiesel cars
All carmakersVolvo V40All carmakersVolvo V40
1996+4%+3% +2%-
Show all years
1997+3%+4% +3%+6%
1998+3%+8% +4%+6%
1999+3%+6% +5%+7%
2000+4%+7% +5%+7%

See below for the actual consumption of generations and versions of Volvo V40.

1996 - 2000

Volvo V40 1996 wagon fuel economy

Average advertised fuel consumption for petrol engines26.8 MPG
8.8 l/100km
Average real-world fuel consumption for petrol engines25.5 MPG
9.2 l/100km
Average real gasoline consumption difference *+6%
Average advertised fuel consumption for diesel engines39.5 MPG
6.0 l/100km
Average real-world fuel consumption for diesel engines37.0 MPG
6.4 l/100km
Average real diesel consumption difference *+7%

According to advertised fuel consumption, a Volvo V40 1996 with automatic transmission consumes on average 0.6 liters per 100 km or 6% more fuel than similar versions with manual gearbox. Based on user-reported real-world fuel consumption, this generation Volvo V40 with automatic transmission consumes around 0.5 litres per 100 km or 6% more fuel than a version with the same engine but a manual gearbox.

Compared to similar cars from other manufacturers, the Volvo V40 fuel economy is slightly worse than average. The best real fuel economy in its class according to user reviews of all the modifications has modification with 1.9 petrol engine and automatic transmission (Volvo V40 1997 1.9 T4 200 HP). However, of all modifications the best advertised fuel economy in its class has Volvo V40 with 1.8 petrol engine and manual transmission (Volvo V40 1998 1.8i 125 HP).

ModificationClaimed consumptionReal consumption
1.6 liter petrol engine
Volvo V40 1999 1.6 109 HP manual 29.4 MPG
8.0 l/100km
28.0 MPG
8.4 l/100km+5%
1.7 liter petrol engine
Volvo V40 1996 1.7 1.8 115 HP manual 27.4 MPG
8.6 l/100km
28.0 MPG
8.4 l/100km-2%
Volvo V40 1996 1.7 1.8 115 HP automatic 25.8 MPG
9.1 l/100km
23.8 MPG
9.9 l/100km+9%
1.8 liter petrol engine
Volvo V40 1999 1.8 122 HP manual 28.7 MPG
8.2 l/100km
27.7 MPG
8.5 l/100km+4%
Volvo V40 1999 1.8 122 HP automatic 26.4 MPG
8.9 l/100km
26.1 MPG
9.0 l/100km+1%
Volvo V40 1998 1.8i 125 HP manual 34.1 MPG
6.9 l/100km
28.0 MPG
8.4 l/100km+22%
1.9 liter petrol engine
Volvo V40 1999 1.9 2.0 136 HP manual 28.0 MPG
8.4 l/100km
27.0 MPG
8.7 l/100km+4%
Volvo V40 1999 1.9 2.0 136 HP automatic 25.8 MPG
9.1 l/100km
Volvo V40 1996 1.9 2.0 140 HP manual 26.1 MPG
9.0 l/100km
25.3 MPG
9.3 l/100km+3%
Volvo V40 1996 1.9 2.0 140 HP automatic 25.3 MPG
9.3 l/100km
Volvo V40 1998 1.9 2.0 T 160 HP manual 26.4 MPG
8.9 l/100km
24.0 MPG
9.8 l/100km+10%
Volvo V40 1998 1.9 2.0 T 160 HP automatic 24.8 MPG
9.5 l/100km
22.6 MPG
10.4 l/100km+9%
Volvo V40 1997 1.9 T4 200 HP manual 25.6 MPG
9.2 l/100km
22.8 MPG
10.3 l/100km+12%
Volvo V40 1997 1.9 T4 200 HP automatic 24.2 MPG
9.7 l/100km
24.8 MPG
9.5 l/100km-2%
1.9 liter diesel engine
Volvo V40 1997 1.9 TD 90 HP manual 37.3 MPG
6.3 l/100km
35.1 MPG
6.7 l/100km+6%
Volvo V40 1999 1.9 D 95 HP manual 42.0 MPG
5.6 l/100km
39.2 MPG
6.0 l/100km+7%

* - Difference between advertised and user reported fuel economy has been calculated taking into account only those car versions for which information is available both on the fuel consumption specified by the manufacturer and reported by users.

User-reported fuel consumption may not accurately represent all users' experiences due to variables such as driving conditions, driving style, technical condition of the vehicle, and other circumstances. Thus, it should not be relied upon as a representative indicator.