1952 Mercedes-Benz 300 vs. 2010 Volvo C30
To start off, 2010 Volvo C30 is newer by 58 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1952 Mercedes-Benz 300. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1952 Mercedes-Benz 300 would be higher.
Because 1952 Mercedes-Benz 300 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 1952 Mercedes-Benz 300. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2010 Volvo C30, 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:
| 1952 Mercedes-Benz 300 | 2010 Volvo C30 | |
| Make | Mercedes-Benz | Volvo |
| Model | 300 | C30 |
| Year Released | 1952 | 2010 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 0 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Diesel |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Vehicle Length | 4220 mm | 4252 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1780 mm | 1783 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1300 mm | 1448 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2390 mm | 2639 mm |
