Compare performance (340 HP vs 442 HP), boot space and price (40,700 £ vs 46,500 £ ) at a glance. Find out which car is the better choice for you – Audi Q4 e-tron or Volvo EC40?
The rapidly evolving landscape of electric vehicles has introduced some remarkable contenders. In the spotlight today, we have the Audi Q4 e-tron and the Volvo EC40, two SUVs that promise innovation, performance, and sustainability. Let's delve into the technical prowess and unique features of these electrified warriors.
The Audi Q4 e-tron is available with a selection of power outputs ranging from 170 to a robust 340 horsepower, driven through either rear-wheel or all-wheel configurations. With an acceleration from 0 to 100 km/h in as fast as 5.4 seconds, it doesn’t compromise on exhilarating performance despite its substantial curb weight of up to 2235 kg. Audi’s transmission is a seamless automatic reduction gearbox, optimizing efficiency and drive smoothness.
On the other hand, the Volvo EC40 comes equipped with power options between 238 and an impressive 408 horsepower. It achieves a slightly faster 0 to 100 km/h time of 4.6 seconds, closely competing with Audi’s performance credentials. Like the Audi, the EC40 employs an automatic reduction gearbox for its transmission duties, ensuring quiet and efficient cruising.
Efficiency is where these SUVs truly shine. The Q4 e-tron boasts various electric ranges depending on the configuration, stretching up to a commendable 554 km on a single charge, while consumption hovers around 15.9 to 17.4 kWh/100 km. The battery options include capacities of 52 and 77 kWh, accommodating diverse driving needs.
Competing closely, the Volvo EC40 offers an outstanding range, peaking at 584 km. It promises a competitive consumption figure between 16.2 and 17.3 kWh/100 km. The available battery capacities are 67 and 79 kWh, illustrating the EC40’s focus on long journeys and efficiency.
Design is a subjective realm, yet both brands offer their distinct aesthetic. The Audi Q4 e-tron, at a length of 4588 mm, exudes an assertive road presence, complemented by a spacious interior that accommodates five passengers comfortably. With a trunk capacity reaching up to 535 liters, practicality is as much a priority as style.
The Volvo EC40’s sleek silhouette, spanning a length of 4440 mm, also welcomes five occupants, though its trunk capacity is slightly smaller at 404 liters. Volvo's design language focuses on Nordic minimalism and sophistication, catering to those who desire a blend of form and function.
Both the Audi Q4 e-tron and Volvo EC40 bring their unique strengths to the table, appealing to different types of drivers. Audi offers a slightly longer range and a bigger boot space, making it a strong contender for longer trips and families who need extra space. Conversely, Volvo impresses with its slightly quicker acceleration and pioneering design.
Your choice between them might ultimately hinge on preference for brand aesthetics, specific range needs, or power desires. In the growing world of electric SUVs, both models epitomize the progress and potential of sustainable automotive innovation.
Looking at overall running costs, both models reveal some interesting differences in everyday economy.
Audi Q4 e-tron is a bit cheaper – starting at 40,700 £ , while the Volvo EC40 costs 46,500 £ . That’s a price difference of around 5,820 £.
In terms of energy consumption, the Audi Q4 e-tron is only slightly more efficient: consuming 14.8 kWh/100km compared to 16.2 kWh/100km for the Volvo EC40. That’s a difference of about 1.4 kWh/100km.
As for electric range, the Audi Q4 e-tron offers very slightly more range – reaching up to 592 km, about 7 km more than the Volvo EC40.
Power, torque and acceleration say a lot about how a car feels on the road. This is where you see which model delivers more driving dynamics.
When it comes to engine power, the Volvo EC40 offers noticeably more power – delivering 442 HP compared to 340 HP. That’s roughly 102 HP more horsepower.
When accelerating from 0 to 100 km/h, the Volvo EC40 is moderately quicker – completing the sprint in 4.6 s, while the Audi Q4 e-tron takes 5.4 s. That’s about 0.8 s quicker.
There’s also a difference in torque: the Audi Q4 e-tron delivers only slightly more torque with 679 Nm compared to 670 Nm. That’s about 9 Nm more.
Beyond pure performance, interior space and usability matter most in daily life. This is where you see which car is more practical and versatile.
Both vehicles offer seating for 5 people.
In terms of curb weight, Audi Q4 e-tron is barely lighter – 2,035 kg compared to 2,065 kg. The difference is around 30 kg.
Looking at boot space, the Audi Q4 e-tron offers visibly more boot space – 535 L compared to 404 L. That’s a difference of about 131 L.
When it comes to payload, the Audi Q4 e-tron carries moderately more – 515 kg compared to 435 kg. That’s a difference of about 80 kg.
The Audi Q4 e-tron sits just ahead overall in the objective data comparison.
This result only shows which model scores more points on paper – not which of the two cars feels right for you.
The Audi Q4 e-tron blends Audi’s clean, modern styling with a practical, well-built interior, making it a refined option for buyers who want a premium electric compact SUV. It offers a quiet, composed ride and intuitive tech, so it’s well suited to daily commuting and family duties while keeping the switch to electric straightforward.
details
The Volvo EC40 feels like a polished slice of Scandinavian calm on wheels, blending minimalist design with a cocoon-like interior that makes everyday driving surprisingly serene. It’s an electric compact that puts safety and comfort front and center, while still injecting enough personality and tech-savvy charm to keep city buyers smiling.
details
Costs and Consumption |
|
|---|---|
|
Price
40,700 - 53,100 £
|
Price
46,500 - 59,000 £
|
|
Consumption L/100km
-
|
Consumption L/100km
-
|
|
Consumption kWh/100km
14.8 - 16.2 kWh/100km
|
Consumption kWh/100km
16.2 - 17.3 kWh/100km
|
|
Electric Range
440 - 592 km
|
Electric Range
486 - 585 km
|
|
Battery Capacity
-
|
Battery Capacity
-
|
|
co2
0 g/km
|
co2
0 g/km
|
|
Fuel tank capacity
-
|
Fuel tank capacity
-
|
Dimensions and Body |
|
|---|---|
|
Body Type
SUV
|
Body Type
SUV
|
|
Seats
5
|
Seats
5
|
|
Doors
-
|
Doors
-
|
|
Curb weight
2,035 - 2,235 kg
|
Curb weight
2,065 - 2,185 kg
|
|
Trunk capacity
515 - 535 L
|
Trunk capacity
404 L
|
|
Length
-
|
Length
-
|
|
Width
1,865 mm
|
Width
1,873 mm
|
|
Height
-
|
Height
-
|
|
Max trunk capacity
-
|
Max trunk capacity
-
|
|
Payload
505 - 515 kg
|
Payload
395 - 435 kg
|
Engine and Performance |
|
|---|---|
|
Engine Type
Electric
|
Engine Type
Electric
|
|
Transmission
Automatic
|
Transmission
Automatic
|
|
Transmission Detail
Reduction Gearbox
|
Transmission Detail
Reduction Gearbox
|
|
Drive Type
Rear-Wheel Drive, All-Wheel Drive
|
Drive Type
Rear-Wheel Drive, All-Wheel Drive
|
|
Power HP
204 - 340 HP
|
Power HP
238 - 442 HP
|
|
Acceleration 0-100km/h
5.4 - 8.1 s
|
Acceleration 0-100km/h
4.6 - 7.3 s
|
|
Max Speed
-
|
Max Speed
-
|
|
Torque
350 - 679 Nm
|
Torque
420 - 670 Nm
|
|
Number of Cylinders
-
|
Number of Cylinders
-
|
|
Power kW
150 - 250 kW
|
Power kW
175 - 325 kW
|
|
Engine capacity
-
|
Engine capacity
-
|
General |
|
|---|---|
|
Model Year
2026
|
Model Year
2,024 - 2,026
|
|
CO2 Efficiency Class
A
|
CO2 Efficiency Class
A
|
|
Brand
Audi
|
Brand
Volvo
|
Deutschland
France
Nederland
Great Britain
Sverige
Danmark
Suomi
Italia
Polska
Česko
España