1972 Citroen SM vs. 1980 Volvo 66
To start off, 1980 Volvo 66 is newer by 8 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1972 Citroen SM. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1972 Citroen SM would be higher. At 2,669 cc (6 cylinders), 1972 Citroen SM is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1972 Citroen SM (173 HP @ 5500 RPM) has 117 more horse power than 1980 Volvo 66. (56 HP @ 5100 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1972 Citroen SM should accelerate faster than 1980 Volvo 66.
Because 1980 Volvo 66 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 1980 Volvo 66. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1972 Citroen SM, 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, 1972 Citroen SM (237 Nm @ 4000 RPM) has 143 more torque (in Nm) than 1980 Volvo 66. (94 Nm @ 2800 RPM). This means 1972 Citroen SM will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1980 Volvo 66.
Compare all specifications:
1972 Citroen SM | 1980 Volvo 66 | |
Make | Citroen | Volvo |
Model | SM | 66 |
Year Released | 1972 | 1980 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2669 cc | 1287 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 173 HP | 56 HP |
Engine RPM | 5500 RPM | 5100 RPM |
Torque | 237 Nm | 94 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4000 RPM | 2800 RPM |
Engine Bore Size | 87 mm | 73 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 75 mm | 77 mm |
Engine Compression Ratio | 9.0:1 | 8.5:1 |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Front | Rear |
Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
Vehicle Length | 4900 mm | 3910 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1850 mm | 1550 mm |