Jump to content

Welcome to Autoworld Forum !

Sign In or Register to gain full access to our forums. By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

Close
Photo

can s40 2.4 beat accord 2.4 on highway?


  • Please log in to reply

#11
kenlairk

Posted 29 January 2007 - 09:39 AM

kenlairk

    Taxi Driver

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 326 posts
hi jawajoe, no problem...agree ur comment..but no chance to try the 2.3L
Mazda yet..just tested a 147 (Alfa) during weekend, not so responsive but
handling ok..even understeer at U-turn..but still manageable..cheers

#12
pocik71

Posted 02 February 2007 - 03:58 AM

pocik71

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 137 posts
Ohhhhh Godddddd....I miss my old VOLVO 850R when I saw this....

#13
alexklchew

Posted 06 February 2007 - 07:59 PM

alexklchew

    White Lightning

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 8,285 posts
Please don't waste our time comparing a Volvo to a Honda. Big Smile

***cabuts***

#14
evolve

Posted 07 February 2007 - 10:25 AM

evolve

    Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 16 posts
yup i agree with our friend here.In my view i think both volvo S40 2.4 and
honda accord 2.4 are equal....volvo is good in its safety(no doubt)
wherelse honda is a good for comfort.

#15
Magna

Posted 15 February 2007 - 06:03 PM

Magna

    Road Warrior

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 803 posts
Of course we can compare honda with volvo. What logic is that we can't
compare japanese against euro.

The challenges is that both camp or even the US have a distinct features
and taste that differ them just like Euro Accord, JDM or US version.

Only in Malaysia where we have problems of not being able to view the
merit of the car due to the price and custom structure that we all
lumping cars into pricing category.

Not sure what is Accord price in UK or US, is that same as Volvo S40?

In Malaysia, the S40 is about 40-50K more. Comparing it against the
Accord 3.0 is close enough on prices but not same cc class....

So taking what kenlairk wanted and as per my reply on other thread? On
highway, it all depends on who have the biggest ball.

Though Volvo is known for safety due to its early day innovations but
many maker today have car with higher rating than volvo but its the
history and image that persist.

#16
Kwar

Posted 19 March 2007 - 02:17 PM

Kwar

    Road Warrior

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 656 posts
S40 2.4 is faster than S60 2.0T !!!

#17
V406198

Posted 19 March 2007 - 07:09 PM

V406198

    Fast & Furious

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,151 posts
r u sure 2.4 are fasted on the road ?..170bhp vs 180bhp.....maybe on
power to weight ratio is true la.

#18
kenlairk

Posted 20 March 2007 - 01:33 AM

kenlairk

    Taxi Driver

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 326 posts
tested both..still feel like turbo 2.0 better eventhough heavier..

#19
phat7

Posted 20 March 2007 - 11:01 AM

phat7

    Taxi Driver

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 372 posts
tested both the s40 2.4 and s60 2.0T and theres hardly any comparision.
The s40 was much quicker off the mark and had a nice linear power band
upto redline. I suppose by staying NA thats the advantage. The s60 2.0T
is very nice but the power was a let down. On paper the s40 is faster
than the s60 2.0T. I booked the s40 for the wife after realising the s40
had larger rear legroom compared to the s60.



#20
V406198

Posted 20 March 2007 - 12:04 PM

V406198

    Fast & Furious

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,151 posts
phat7

wonder when you tested the S60 2.0t....do you drive with turbo kick in
with all gears change ? i had tested S40 as well.. as what you said
...have very nice linear & stable power band to redline..but still feel it
cant compare to the force of turbo kick...if you had drive the turbo
model before then you will understand what i mean...BTW do agreed
with you on the S40 rear legroom is much spaces.