2025 · Q8 e-tron quattro (20 inch wheels)
Side by side · 2025 and 2026
Audi Q8 e-tronvsVolvo EC40
272 mi EPA · 27 min 10–80%298 mi EPA · 30 min 10–80%
vs
The Audi Q8 e-tron is rated 272 miles on the EPA test, the Volvo EC40 298. A 10–80% stop takes 27 minutes in the Audi Q8 e-tron and 30 in the Volvo EC40. Every figure below names the version of the car it belongs to, and the three tools further down turn the same numbers into a charging race, a road trip and a yearly bill.
At a glance
Audi Q8 e-tron · Q8 e-tron quattro (20 inch wheels)
272mi EPA
27min 10–80%
Volvo EC40 · EC40
298mi EPA
30min 10–80%
The short answer
The Volvo EC40 turns the same electricity into more miles.
1
The Volvo EC40 is rated 298 miles against 272 — 26 miles, 10% further. It uses 43.2 kWh to cover 100 miles where the Volvo EC40 needs 31.7.
2
A 10–80% stop takes 27 minutes in the Audi Q8 e-tron and 30 in the Volvo EC40. On a 50 kW post it is 75 and 56 minutes, so most of the advantage disappears at a slow site.
3
The Audi Q8 e-tron makes 250 kW against 175.
Which one, in one line
Pick the Volvo EC40 ifit wins on range (298 mi against 272), running cost (31.7 kWh per 100 miles against 43.2).
The priceNeither car has a US list price in the sheet yet, so nothing here claims an MSRP or a monthly payment.
2026 · EC40
Charging, raced
Two cars, one post, same clock
Charging speed is a station number and a car number, and the smaller one wins. Set the post and both cars fill against the same clock — the interesting part is not who wins, it is how much of the gap a slow post takes away.
Each car is modelled on its own published 10–80% time, which gives an average power over that window: 138 kW for the Audi Q8 e-tron, 94 kW for the Volvo EC40. A post above that average changes nothing; a post below it sets the pace.
Volvo EC40CCS130min
Audi Q8 e-tronCCS127min
At 150 kW, going from 10% to 80% takes 27 min in the Audi Q8 e-tron and 30 min in the Volvo EC40 — a gap of 3 minutes. Both cars are limited by their own packs at this post, so a bigger station would change nothing.
Every figure
The numbers, with the version attached
A tick marks a figure that is simply more useful — more range, less energy per mile, a faster stop. Rows without a tick are different, not better: a bigger battery, a longer wheelbase and a wider body are all trades, and this page does not pretend otherwise.
| Measure | Audi Q8 e-tron | Volvo EC40 |
|---|---|---|
| Range and efficiency | ||
| EPA range | 272 mi2025 Q8 e-tron quattro (20 inch wheels) | 298 mi✓2026 EC40 |
| EPA efficiency | 2.32 mi/kWh | 3.16 mi/kWh✓ |
| Energy per 100 miles | 43.2 kWh | 31.7 kWh✓ |
| Battery, usable | 89 kWhAudi Q8 Sportback e-tron 50 quattro | 67 kWhVolvo EC40 Single Motor (MY26) |
| Range left in the cold | 56%modelled envelope | 57%modelled envelope |
| Charging | ||
| DC peak | 155 kW | 180 kW✓ |
| 10–80% at peak | 27 min✓ | 30 min |
| Average power, 10–80%(derived) | 138 kW✓ | 94 kW |
| AC maximum | 11 kW | 11 kW |
| Full charge on 240 V | 16 h | 8 h✓ |
| Fast-charge plug | CCS1 | CCS1 |
| Size and weight | ||
| Length | 193.5 in | 174.8 in |
| Width with mirrors | 86.2 in | 80.1 in |
| Height | 63.7 in | 62.8 in |
| Wheelbase | 115.3 in | 106.4 in |
| Kerb weight | 5,699 lb | 4,535 lb |
| Space and practicality | ||
| Seats | 5 | 5 |
| Boot, seats up | 18.6 cu ft✓ | 14.3 cu ft |
| Front trunk | 2.2 cu ft✓ | 1.1 cu ft |
| Maximum cargo | 55.3 cu ft✓ | 42.2 cu ft |
| Towing, braked | 3,968 lb✓ | 3,307 lb |
| Heat pump | Standard Equipment | Standard Equipment |
| Performance and safety | ||
| Power | 250 kW✓ | 175 kW |
| 0–100 km/h | 6 s✓ | 7.3 s |
| Euro NCAP stars | 5 | — |
| Battery warranty | — | 8 years / 99,419 mi8 years / 160,000 km |
| V2L / V2H | Not supported | Not supported |
How to read the mixed rows. Range and efficiency come from one EPA row — the longest-range version of each car's current model year, not the longest range it has ever been rated at. Battery, charging and the catalogue dimensions come from the catalogue's headline record, which is not always the same trim. Each of those rows names its trim where the two disagree, and the model pages carry the full per-trim table.
What the cold row is not. “Range left in the cold” is the catalogue's modelled cold-highway figure as a share of its mild-urban one — a European model, not an EPA test in US weather. It is shown as a share rather than in miles so it cannot be mistaken for a US range rating.
Euro NCAP is the European crash programme; NHTSA and IIHS ratings are not in this dataset and are not claimed here. Warranty terms are the catalogue's kilometre figures converted to miles, so read them as indicative until a US warranty source replaces them.
Your numbers
What this pair costs you, on your drive
Two questions decide most purchases: how often you stop, and what the year costs. Both are arithmetic on the figures above, so change the inputs and the answer changes with you.
The drive
Starts full, arrives at 10%, charges back to 80% at each stop, and assumes a highway range of 85% of the EPA figure.
- Audi Q8 e-tron
- 3
- Volvo EC40
- 2
stops · 81 min charging
stops · 60 min charging
The year
Energy at the wheels from the EPA label, priced at the tariff you pay. Home charging is usually cheaper than the directory's median.
- Audi Q8 e-tron
- $1,813
- Volvo EC40
- $1,331
$15 per 100 mi
$11 per 100 mi
The trip model ignores charger detours, queueing and the last 10% of the pack, which is slow on both cars. The yearly cost is energy only: no session fees, no idle fees, no home-charger installation, and no petrol car to compare against.
Your priorities
A verdict you can argue with
There is no single winner, only a winner for a set of priorities. Move the sliders and the weighting changes — nothing here is a magazine score, and the page never hides the numbers it is built from.
Weighted result
Audi Q8 e-tron
wins 4 of 6 measures on these weights
Audi Q8 e-tron53%
Volvo EC4047%
Each measure is scaled between the two cars, so a weight of 5 means “this is the thing I care about” and 0 means “I do not care at all”. The scores are relative, not a rating out of ten.
Questions
Short answers, then the reasoning
Every figure here comes from the same data as the rest of the page. Where the data cannot answer, the page says so instead of guessing.
Still unsure about a term? The charging glossary covers the rest of them.
Which has more range, the Audi Q8 e-tron or the Volvo EC40?
The Volvo EC40. The Audi Q8 e-tron is rated 272 miles and the Volvo EC40 298, each on the longest-range version of its current model year — 2025 Q8 e-tron quattro (20 inch wheels) and 2026 EC40 respectively. EPA figures are lab scores from one standard test, not a promise for a cold morning or a steady 75 mph.
Which charges faster?
The Audi Q8 e-tron. Going from 10% to 80% takes 27 minutes in the Audi Q8 e-tron (155 kW peak) and 30 in the Volvo EC40 (180 kW peak). At a slow post the station becomes the limit and the gap narrows, because the slower car is short of power rather than short of time.
Do they use the same plug?
Yes. Both list CCS1 for DC fast charging, so either car can use the same sites without an adapter. An adapter still cannot raise the power a car will accept.
Which is cheaper to run?
The Volvo EC40, by about $1,379.05 a year at 12,000 miles and $0.35 per kWh. It uses 31.7 kWh per 100 miles against 43.2. That is energy only, at the wheels: session fees, idle fees and home-charger installation are not in it.
Which has more space?
The Audi Q8 e-tron: 18.6 cu ft of boot against 14.3 cu ft. Boot volumes are measured by different conventions between makers, so read the direction as reliable and the exact size of the gap as indicative.
Is there a price comparison?
Not yet — neither car has a US list price in the current dataset. When a price source covers both, price becomes one more row in the table and one more slider in the weighting tool.
Other comparisons
All comparisonsEvery figure on this page comes from the same records the Audi Q8 e-tron and Volvo EC40 pages use. How the sources are chosen, and what a figure here never claims, is on the methodology page.