1956 Rolls-Royce Phantom vs. 2002 Volvo S60
To start off, 2002 Volvo S60 is newer by 46 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1956 Rolls-Royce Phantom. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1956 Rolls-Royce Phantom would be higher.
Because 1956 Rolls-Royce Phantom 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 1956 Rolls-Royce Phantom. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2002 Volvo S60, 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:
| 1956 Rolls-Royce Phantom | 2002 Volvo S60 | |
| Make | Rolls-Royce | Volvo |
| Model | Phantom | S60 |
| Year Released | 1956 | 2002 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 5 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 128 HP |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Number of Seats | 7 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Width | 1960 mm | 1810 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3690 mm | 2670 mm |
