1948 Volvo PV 60 vs. 2013 Honda CR-Z
To start off, 2013 Honda CR-Z is newer by 65 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1948 Volvo PV 60. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1948 Volvo PV 60 would be higher. At 3,670 cc (6 cylinders), 1948 Volvo PV 60 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2013 Honda CR-Z (120 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 35 more horse power than 1948 Volvo PV 60. (85 HP @ 3400 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2013 Honda CR-Z should accelerate faster than 1948 Volvo PV 60. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1948 Volvo PV 60 weights approximately 434 kg more than 2013 Honda CR-Z.
Because 1948 Volvo PV 60 is rear wheel drive (RWD), it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, it will be much easier to do with 1948 Volvo PV 60. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2013 Honda CR-Z, being front wheel drive (FWD), will offer much better control with better grip. With that said, do keep in mind that many other factors such as speed and the wear on your tires can also have significant impact on traction and control.
Compare all specifications:
1948 Volvo PV 60 | 2013 Honda CR-Z | |
Make | Volvo | Honda |
Model | PV 60 | CR-Z |
Year Released | 1948 | 2013 |
Engine Size | 3670 cc | 1497 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 85 HP | 120 HP |
Engine RPM | 3400 RPM | 6000 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | 6-speed manual |
Vehicle Weight | 1630 kg | 1196 kg |
Wheelbase Size | 2850 mm | 2435 mm |