1964 Volvo 220 vs. 2013 Toyota Tundra
To start off, 2013 Toyota Tundra is newer by 49 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1964 Volvo 220. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1964 Volvo 220 would be higher. At 4,600 cc (8 cylinders), 2013 Toyota Tundra is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2013 Toyota Tundra (306 HP @ 5600 RPM) has 232 more horse power than 1964 Volvo 220. (74 HP @ 4500 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2013 Toyota Tundra should accelerate faster than 1964 Volvo 220. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2013 Toyota Tundra weights approximately 1366 kg more than 1964 Volvo 220. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Let's talk about torque, 2013 Toyota Tundra (443 Nm @ 3400 RPM) has 299 more torque (in Nm) than 1964 Volvo 220. (144 Nm @ 2300 RPM). This means 2013 Toyota Tundra will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1964 Volvo 220.
Compare all specifications:
| 1964 Volvo 220 | 2013 Toyota Tundra | |
| Make | Volvo | Toyota |
| Model | 220 | Tundra |
| Year Released | 1964 | 2013 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1776 cc | 4600 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 74 HP | 306 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4500 RPM | 5600 RPM |
| Torque | 144 Nm | 443 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2300 RPM | 3400 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Number of Doors | 3 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1015 kg | 2381 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4460 mm | 5329 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1620 mm | 2029 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1510 mm | 1925 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2610 mm | 3221 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 45 L | 100 L |
