Toyota C-HR+ 77 kWh (2026–) vs Volvo EX40 Single Motor Essential (2024–2026): which costs less?
Total cost at 15,000 km/yr: Toyota C-HR+ 77 kWh (2026–) €656/mo · Volvo EX40 Single Motor Essential (2024–2026) €668/mo. Toyota C-HR+ 77 kWh (2026–) stays the cheaper car across all usage profiles (8,000–30,000 km/yr).
The trade-offs
- Toyota C-HR+ 77 kWh (2026–) costs about €12 less per month at 15,000 km/yr.
- Toyota C-HR+ 77 kWh (2026–) goes 69 km further in real −10 °C conditions.
- Toyota C-HR+ 77 kWh (2026–) spends 13 minutes less at fast chargers over a 600 km trip.
- Toyota C-HR+ 77 kWh (2026–) has 6 l more boot space.
Side by side
| Toyota C-HR+ 77 kWh (2026–) | Volvo EX40 Single Motor Essential (2024–2026) | |
|---|---|---|
| List price | €45,990 (better) | €47,490 |
| €/month (15,000 km) | €656 (better) | €668 |
| €/month (25,000 km) | €755 (better) | €784 |
| Range (WLTP) | 607 km (better) | 477 km |
| Footprint (L×W, excl. mirrors) | 8.45 m² | 8.27 m² |
| Real range (mild/cold) | 544 km / 407 km (better) | 428 km / 338 km |
| 600 km long trip | 1 charging stop · +22 min (better) | 2 charging stops · +35 min |
| Consumption (WLTP) | 13.4 kWh/100 km (better) | 17.2 kWh/100 km |
| Battery | 72.0 kWh | 67.0 kWh |
| Max DC charge | 150 kW | 180 kW (better) |
| 0–100 km/h | 7.3 s | 7.3 s |
| Boot | 416 L (better) | 410 L |
| Seats | 5 | 5 |
Break-even by mileage
| km/yr | Toyota C-HR+ 77 kWh (2026–) | Volvo EX40 Single Motor Essential (2024–2026) |
|---|---|---|
| 10,000 | €605 | €609 |
| 15,000 | €656 | €668 |
| 20,000 | €706 | €726 |
| 25,000 | €755 | €784 |
| 30,000 | €805 | €842 |
Compare interactively → · Toyota C-HR+ 77 kWh (2026–): cost deep-dive · Volvo EX40 Single Motor Essential (2024–2026): cost deep-dive