1964 Cadillac Sixty vs. 2010 Volvo S80
To start off, 2010 Volvo S80 is newer by 46 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1964 Cadillac Sixty. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1964 Cadillac Sixty would be higher. At 7,027 cc (8 cylinders), 1964 Cadillac Sixty is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1964 Cadillac Sixty (208 HP) has 94 more horse power than 2010 Volvo S80. (114 HP). In normal driving conditions, 1964 Cadillac Sixty should accelerate faster than 2010 Volvo S80. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1964 Cadillac Sixty weights approximately 511 kg more than 2010 Volvo S80. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 1964 Cadillac Sixty 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 1964 Cadillac Sixty. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2010 Volvo S80, 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:
| 1964 Cadillac Sixty | 2010 Volvo S80 | |
| Make | Cadillac | Volvo |
| Model | Sixty | S80 |
| Year Released | 1964 | 2010 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 7027 cc | 1600 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 208 HP | 114 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Diesel |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 2120 kg | 1609 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5670 mm | 4628 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 2030 mm | 1864 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1430 mm | 1483 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3300 mm | 2776 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 79 L | 67 L |
