1963 NSU 1000 LS vs. 2009 Volvo C70
To start off, 2009 Volvo C70 is newer by 46 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1963 NSU 1000 LS. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1963 NSU 1000 LS would be higher. At 2,521 cc (5 cylinders), 2009 Volvo C70 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Volvo C70 (224 HP @ 5000 RPM) has 182 more horse power than 1963 NSU 1000 LS. (42 HP @ 5000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Volvo C70 should accelerate faster than 1963 NSU 1000 LS.
Because 1963 NSU 1000 LS 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 NSU 1000 LS. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2009 Volvo C70, 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, 2009 Volvo C70 (236 Nm @ 1500 RPM) has 166 more torque (in Nm) than 1963 NSU 1000 LS. (70 Nm @ 2000 RPM). This means 2009 Volvo C70 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1963 NSU 1000 LS.
Compare all specifications:
1963 NSU 1000 LS | 2009 Volvo C70 | |
Make | NSU | Volvo |
Model | 1000 LS | C70 |
Year Released | 1963 | 2009 |
Engine Position | Rear | Front |
Engine Size | 996 cc | 2521 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 5 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 42 HP | 224 HP |
Engine RPM | 5000 RPM | 5000 RPM |
Torque | 70 Nm | 236 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2000 RPM | 1500 RPM |
Engine Compression Ratio | 8.0:1 | 9.0:1 |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Width | 1490 mm | 1840 mm |