1975 Mazda RX-2 vs. 2011 Volvo C30
To start off, 2011 Volvo C30 is newer by 36 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1975 Mazda RX-2. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1975 Mazda RX-2 would be higher. At 2,292 cc, 1975 Mazda RX-2 is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2011 Volvo C30 weights approximately 491 kg more than 1975 Mazda RX-2.
Because 1975 Mazda RX-2 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 1975 Mazda RX-2. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2011 Volvo C30, 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, 2011 Volvo C30 (400 Nm @ 1400 RPM) has 243 more torque (in Nm) than 1975 Mazda RX-2. (157 Nm @ 3500 RPM). This means 2011 Volvo C30 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1975 Mazda RX-2.
Compare all specifications:
| 1975 Mazda RX-2 | 2011 Volvo C30 | |
| Make | Mazda | Volvo |
| Model | RX-2 | C30 |
| Year Released | 1975 | 2011 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2292 cc | 2000 cc |
| Engine Type | dual-disk rotary | in-line |
| Horse Power | 118 HP | 0 HP |
| Torque | 157 Nm | 400 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3500 RPM | 1400 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Diesel |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 960 kg | 1451 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4160 mm | 4252 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1590 mm | 1783 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1400 mm | 1448 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2480 mm | 2639 mm |
