Peugeot e-2008 vs Volvo EX30

Biggest differences: DC charging — Peugeot e-2008 100 kW, Volvo EX30 175 kW · Power — Peugeot e-2008 156 PS, Volvo EX30 272 PS · 0–100 km/h — Peugeot e-2008 9.1 s, Volvo EX30 5.3 s.

Peugeot e-2008

An electric SUV in the B segment, offering a range of 406 kilometers and front-wheel drive.

Volvo EX30

The Volvo EX30 is an all-electric SUV in the B segment, offering a wide range of powertrain configurations with varying ranges and performance levels.

Profile against the market: Peugeot e-2008 vs Volvo EX30

WLTP rangeBatteryPowerDC charging0–100 km/h

Peugeot e-2008 or Volvo EX30 — who wins where

Volvo EX30 leads 6 to 3

Click a slice to see only those metrics. Each bar shows where the car stands against the whole catalogue.

  • WLTP range kmVolvo EX30 +69 km
    Peugeot e-2008
    406
    Volvo EX30
    475
  • Battery kWhVolvo EX30 +15 kWh
    Peugeot e-2008
    54
    Volvo EX30
    69
  • Consumption kWh/100 kmPeugeot e-2008 −1.5 kWh/100 km
    Peugeot e-2008
    15.5
    Volvo EX30
    17
  • Power PSVolvo EX30 +116 PS
    Peugeot e-2008
    156
    Volvo EX30
    272
  • 0–100 km/h sVolvo EX30 −3.8 s
    Peugeot e-2008
    9.1
    Volvo EX30
    5.3
  • Top speed km/hVolvo EX30 +30 km/h
    Peugeot e-2008
    150
    Volvo EX30
    180
  • DC charging kWVolvo EX30 +75 kW
    Peugeot e-2008
    100
    Volvo EX30
    175
  • AC charging kWNo difference
    Peugeot e-2008
    11
    Volvo EX30
    11
  • Weight kgPeugeot e-2008 −227 kg
    Peugeot e-2008
    1548
    Volvo EX30
    1775
  • Boot lPeugeot e-2008 +116 l
    Peugeot e-2008
    434
    Volvo EX30
    318

Add a third car

Technical data: Peugeot e-2008 vs Volvo EX30

Bold and underline = better value · ↓ = lower is better · — = no data

Technical data: Peugeot e-2008 vs Volvo EX30
Key parameters Peugeot e-2008
156
Volvo EX30
P5 Long Range
Difference
Range and energy
WLTP range406 km475 kmVolvo +69 km
Battery54 kWh69 kWhVolvo +15 kWh
Consumption15.5 kWh/100 km17 kWh/100 kmPeugeot −1.5 kWh/100 km
Charging
DC charging100 kW175 kWVolvo +75 kW
AC charging11 kW11 kWNo difference
Charging 30 min 20–80%27 min 10–80%3 min
Range per minute of charging8.1 km/min12.3 km/minVolvo +4.2 km/min
Voltage400 V400 VNo difference
Performance and drivetrain
Power156 PS272 PSVolvo +116 PS
0–100 km/h9.1 s5.3 sVolvo −3.8 s
Top speed150 km/h180 km/hVolvo +30 km/h
DrivetrainFWDRWDdifferent type
Practicality
Weight1548 kg1775 kgPeugeot −227 kg
Boot434 l318 lPeugeot +116 l
V2L (external power)YesNoonly Peugeot
Length4300 mm4233 mmPeugeot +67 mm
Width1770 mm1837 mmVolvo +67 mm
Height1550 mm1549 mmPeugeot +1 mm
Wheelbase2605 mm2650 mmVolvo +45 mm

The better value in each row is bold and underlined in the colour of the car. Metrics marked ↓ — lower is better. Dimensions are shown without picking a winner.

Energy cost calculator

Peugeot e-2008

Cost per 100 km4.65
Monthly58
Yearly697

Volvo EX30

Cost per 100 km5.1
Monthly64
Yearly765

Amounts are in your currency — enter prices in the currency you use.

Video reviews of both models

Peugeot e-2008

Volvo EX30

Other comparisons in this class: SUV, segment B

Frequently asked questions about this comparison

Which has the longer range — Peugeot e-2008 or Volvo EX30?

The Volvo EX30 goes further: 475 km WLTP against the 406 km of the Peugeot e-2008. That is a difference of 69 km.

How do the drivetrains of the Peugeot e-2008 and the Volvo EX30 differ?

The Peugeot e-2008 has FWD and 156 PS. The Volvo EX30 has RWD and 272 PS.

Which one can power appliances from a socket (V2L)?

Only the Peugeot e-2008 — its 54 kWh battery then works as a power source. The Volvo EX30, with 69 kWh, does not offer it.

Which is more powerful — Peugeot e-2008 or Volvo EX30?

The Volvo EX30 is stronger: 272 PS against the 156 PS of the Peugeot e-2008. The gap is 116 PS.

Technical data comes from official manufacturer materials and we do our best to verify it, but a manufacturer can change a specification without notice and mistakes do happen. Confirm the figures with a dealer before you buy — we accept no liability for decisions made on the basis of this data. Full disclaimer

Range, consumption and weight are given for the base configuration: manufacturers homologate them as a band of values that depends on wheels and equipment (e.g. 533–592 km), and we take the lightest variant, on the smallest wheels — i.e. the most favourable. The same model on larger wheels will travel a shorter distance.