1949 Alfa Romeo 6C vs. 1982 Volvo 260
To start off, 1982 Volvo 260 is newer by 33 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1949 Alfa Romeo 6C. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1949 Alfa Romeo 6C would be higher. At 2,849 cc (6 cylinders), 1982 Volvo 260 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1982 Volvo 260 (153 HP @ 5500 RPM) has 59 more horse power than 1949 Alfa Romeo 6C. (94 HP @ 4600 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1982 Volvo 260 should accelerate faster than 1949 Alfa Romeo 6C. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1949 Alfa Romeo 6C weights approximately 4 kg more than 1982 Volvo 260.
Both vehicles are rear wheel drive (RWD) - it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, both vehicles do the job better than front wheel drive vehicles. 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:
| 1949 Alfa Romeo 6C | 1982 Volvo 260 | |
| Make | Alfa Romeo | Volvo |
| Model | 6C | 260 |
| Year Released | 1949 | 1982 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2443 cc | 2849 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 94 HP | 153 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4600 RPM | 5500 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 1374 kg | 1370 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5010 mm | 4890 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1840 mm | 1720 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1580 mm | 1440 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3010 mm | 2660 mm |
