1967 Cadillac DeVille vs. 1983 Volvo 240
To start off, 1983 Volvo 240 is newer by 16 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1967 Cadillac DeVille. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1967 Cadillac DeVille would be higher. At 7,029 cc (8 cylinders), 1967 Cadillac DeVille is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1967 Cadillac DeVille (208 HP @ 4600 RPM) has 86 more horse power than 1983 Volvo 240. (122 HP @ 5500 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1967 Cadillac DeVille should accelerate faster than 1983 Volvo 240. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1967 Cadillac DeVille weights approximately 715 kg more than 1983 Volvo 240. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 1983 Volvo 240 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 1983 Volvo 240. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1967 Cadillac DeVille, 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:
1967 Cadillac DeVille | 1983 Volvo 240 | |
Make | Cadillac | Volvo |
Model | DeVille | 240 |
Year Released | 1967 | 1983 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 7029 cc | 2127 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 208 HP | 122 HP |
Engine RPM | 4600 RPM | 5500 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Front | Rear |
Vehicle Weight | 2025 kg | 1310 kg |
Vehicle Length | 5700 mm | 4790 mm |
Vehicle Width | 2030 mm | 1730 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1370 mm | 1440 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3300 mm | 2660 mm |