Compare Volvo XC40 vs Citroen C4 III
Variants
T4 Recharge
T5 Recharge
T2 MT
T2
T3 MT
T3 Euro6d MT
T3
D3 MT
D3
D3 AWD MT
D3 AWD
D4 AWD
T4
T4 AWD
T5 AWD
Recharge Pure Electric Single Motor
Recharge Pure Electric AWD Twin Motor
1.2 PureTech 102
1.2 PureTech 130
1.2 PureTech 130 AT
1.2 PureTech 155 AT
1.5 HDi 110
1.5 HDi 130 AT
e-C4
Capacity
Cargo Capacity
380 L / 13.4 cu-ft ~ 1250 L / 44.1 cu-ft
Fuel Capacity
50.0 L / 13.2 gal
Passengers
5
Chassis
Brakes | Rear
Disc
Suspension | Front
MacPherson strut
MacPherson strut
Suspension | Rear
Semi-independent, coil spring
Turning Circle
10.9 m / 35.8 ft
Water Fording
450 mm / 17.7 in
Construction
Battery | Capacity
50.0 kWh (gross)
Dimensions
Size | Width
1800 mm / 70.9 in | 2032 mm / 80.0 in (mirror unfolded) | 1834 mm / 72.2 in (mirror folded)
Track Width | Front
1545.0 mm / 60.8 in
Track Width | Rear
1545.0 mm / 60.8 in
Wheelbase
2670 mm / 105.1 in
Powertrain
Engine | Bore
75.0 mm / 3.0 in
Reviews
Neofiliac score
32%
15%
Pros
- Up to 414km electric range
- Low fuel consumption
- Low fuel consumption
Cons
- Only available with small engines
- Stuck with MacPherson struts in the front
- Horrible performance
- Only available with tiny engines
- Poor suspension setup
- Crossover nonsense
Remove
Remove
Add up to 4 products to the comparison using the search bar above
Information on this page is provided on an as-is basis. No warranty on accuracy is implied. This page may contain affiliate links to third-party merchants such as Amazon and eBay. If you make a purchase using the supplied link, we may receive a commission. Neofiliac places the utmost respect for your privacy. We use no cookie whatsoever beyond that needed for the proper functioning of the website.