1952 Riley RM A vs. 2013 Volvo XC90
To start off, 2013 Volvo XC90 is newer by 61 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1952 Riley RM A. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1952 Riley RM A would be higher. At 3,200 cc (6 cylinders), 2013 Volvo XC90 is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2013 Volvo XC90 weights approximately 902 kg more than 1952 Riley RM A.
Because 1952 Riley RM A 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 Riley RM A. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2013 Volvo XC90, 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 Riley RM A | 2013 Volvo XC90 | |
| Make | Riley | Volvo |
| Model | RM A | XC90 |
| Year Released | 1952 | 2013 |
| Engine Size | 1496 cc | 3200 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 6 valves |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 237 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Transmission Type | Manual | 6-speed manual |
| Vehicle Weight | 1235 kg | 2137 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4560 mm | 4807 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1620 mm | 1936 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1550 mm | 1784 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2870 mm | 2857 mm |
