1963 Ford Zodiac vs. 2012 Volvo C30
To start off, 2012 Volvo C30 is newer by 49 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1963 Ford Zodiac. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1963 Ford Zodiac would be higher. At 2,553 cc (6 cylinders), 1963 Ford Zodiac is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2012 Volvo C30 weights approximately 181 kg more than 1963 Ford Zodiac.
Because 1963 Ford Zodiac 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 1963 Ford Zodiac. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2012 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. Let's talk about torque, 2012 Volvo C30 (350 Nm) has 159 more torque (in Nm) than 1963 Ford Zodiac. (191 Nm). This means 2012 Volvo C30 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1963 Ford Zodiac.
Compare all specifications:
1963 Ford Zodiac | 2012 Volvo C30 | |
Make | Ford | Volvo |
Model | Zodiac | C30 |
Year Released | 1963 | 2012 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2553 cc | 2400 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 108 HP | 0 HP |
Torque | 191 Nm | 350 Nm |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Diesel |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | 6-speed manual |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 3 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1270 kg | 1451 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4650 mm | 4252 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1770 mm | 1783 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1448 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2780 mm | 2639 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 45 L | 60 L |