Škoda Enyaq vs Volvo C40 Recharge
How the Škoda Enyaq and the Volvo C40 Recharge compare on real-world range, battery size and efficiency. WLTP is a lab figure — the winter, highway and city estimates below show what each car really does on the road.
Specifications side by side
| Škoda Enyaq | Volvo C40 Recharge | |
|---|---|---|
| WLTP range | 360 mi | 361 mi |
| Usable battery | 77 kWh | 78 kWh |
| WLTP consumption | 15.3 kWh/100 km | 16.3 kWh/100 km |
| Model year | 2027 | 2024 |
Real-world range, side by side
| Škoda Enyaq | Volvo C40 Recharge | |
|---|---|---|
| Winter (−10 °C) | 239 mi | 239 mi |
| Warm weather (30 °C) | 342 mi | 343 mi |
| Motorway | 281 mi | 281 mi |
| City | 388 mi | 390 mi |
The verdict
- Longer range (WLTP)
- Volvo C40 Recharge
- Further in winter
- Tie
- More efficient
- Škoda Enyaq
Frequently asked questions
- Which has more range, the Škoda Enyaq or the Volvo C40 Recharge?
- On the official WLTP cycle the Škoda Enyaq is rated 360 mi and the Volvo C40 Recharge 361 mi. In cold winter driving (around −10 °C) expect roughly 239 mi from the Škoda Enyaq and 239 mi from the Volvo C40 Recharge.
- Which electric car is more efficient?
- Efficiency is the WLTP energy use per 100 km, where lower is better — compare the consumption figures in the table above. The more efficient car uses less electricity for the same distance, so it costs less to charge.