Jeep Wagoneer vs Volvo XC40: Specs Compared

Running cost over five years: at the EPA's 15,000-mile-a-year assumption the Volvo XC40 burns about $700 of fuel annually against $800 for the Jeep Wagoneer. That $100 yearly gap compounds to roughly $500 over five years and $800 over eight — often more than the price difference between two trims of the same vehicle, and the single largest running-cost line item separating these two.

City and highway economy: the Volvo XC40 leads in both cycles — 118 mpg city and 95 mpg highway against 104 and 90 mpg — so its fuel-efficiency advantage holds whether you commute in traffic or cover long highway miles.

Powertrain choice: the Jeep Wagoneer is recorded with 2 distinct engine configurations (SIDI, Mild Hybrid), the Volvo XC40 with 2 (SIDI; Mild Hybrid, SIDI). Across 22 recorded Jeep Wagoneer configurations and 19 for the Volvo XC40, the wider the engine spread the more the real-world fuel efficiency depends on which version you actually buy, so check the specific model year and drivetrain rather than the headline number.

Drivetrain and class: the Jeep Wagoneer is offered with All-Wheel Drive, Rear-Wheel Drive, the Volvo XC40 with All-Wheel Drive, Front-Wheel Drive, Rear-Wheel Drive. All-wheel drive typically costs one to two mpg combined against the same vehicle in front- or rear-wheel drive, which is worth remembering when the gap between these two is small. The EPA classes them as Standard Sport Utility Vehicle 4WD and Small Sport Utility Vehicle 4WD respectively — the class drives the interior volume, cargo space and passenger space each one is measured against.

Tailpipe emissions: at their cleanest configurations the Volvo XC40 emits 326 g/mile of CO2 versus 453 g/mile for the Jeep Wagoneer. Emissions track fuel consumption almost exactly, so the cleaner vehicle here is also the cheaper one to fuel.