1967 Mercury Brougham vs. 2003 Volvo C70
To start off, 2003 Volvo C70 is newer by 36 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1967 Mercury Brougham. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1967 Mercury Brougham would be higher. At 6,990 cc (8 cylinders), 1967 Mercury Brougham is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1967 Mercury Brougham (340 HP @ 4600 RPM) has 98 more horse power than 2003 Volvo C70. (242 HP @ 5250 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1967 Mercury Brougham should accelerate faster than 2003 Volvo C70.
Because 1967 Mercury Brougham 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 1967 Mercury Brougham. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2003 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, 1967 Mercury Brougham (627 Nm @ 2800 RPM) has 307 more torque (in Nm) than 2003 Volvo C70. (320 Nm @ 2400 RPM). This means 1967 Mercury Brougham will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2003 Volvo C70.
Compare all specifications:
1967 Mercury Brougham | 2003 Volvo C70 | |
Make | Mercury | Volvo |
Model | Brougham | C70 |
Year Released | 1967 | 2003 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 6990 cc | 2319 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 5 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 340 HP | 242 HP |
Engine RPM | 4600 RPM | 5250 RPM |
Torque | 627 Nm | 320 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2800 RPM | 2400 RPM |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Vehicle Length | 5560 mm | 4720 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1990 mm | 1820 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1430 mm | 1430 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3130 mm | 2670 mm |