1956 Citroen 2CV vs. 1978 Volvo 240
To start off, 1978 Volvo 240 is newer by 22 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1956 Citroen 2CV. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1956 Citroen 2CV would be higher. At 2,127 cc (4 cylinders), 1978 Volvo 240 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1978 Volvo 240 (104 HP @ 5250 RPM) has 94 more horse power than 1956 Citroen 2CV. (10 HP @ 3500 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1978 Volvo 240 should accelerate faster than 1956 Citroen 2CV.
Because 1978 Volvo 240 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 1978 Volvo 240. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1956 Citroen 2CV, 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. Let's talk about torque, 1978 Volvo 240 (160 Nm @ 2500 RPM) has 138 more torque (in Nm) than 1956 Citroen 2CV. (22 Nm @ 2000 RPM). This means 1978 Volvo 240 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1956 Citroen 2CV.
Compare all specifications:
| 1956 Citroen 2CV | 1978 Volvo 240 | |
| Make | Citroen | Volvo |
| Model | 2CV | 240 |
| Year Released | 1956 | 1978 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 374 cc | 2127 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 2 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | boxer | in-line |
| Horse Power | 10 HP | 104 HP |
| Engine RPM | 3500 RPM | 5250 RPM |
| Torque | 22 Nm | 160 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2000 RPM | 2500 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Length | 3790 mm | 4900 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1490 mm | 1710 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1610 mm | 1440 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2410 mm | 2650 mm |
