1975 Mazda RX-3 vs. 2012 Volvo C30
To start off, 2012 Volvo C30 is newer by 37 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1975 Mazda RX-3. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1975 Mazda RX-3 would be higher. At 1,964 cc, 1975 Mazda RX-3 is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2012 Volvo C30 weights approximately 601 kg more than 1975 Mazda RX-3.
Because 1975 Mazda RX-3 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-3. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2012 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.
Compare all specifications:
1975 Mazda RX-3 | 2012 Volvo C30 | |
Make | Mazda | Volvo |
Model | RX-3 | C30 |
Year Released | 1975 | 2012 |
Body Type | Coupe | Hatchback |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1964 cc | 1600 cc |
Engine Type | dual-disk rotary | in-line |
Horse Power | 100 HP | 0 HP |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Diesel |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 3 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 850 kg | 1451 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4090 mm | 4252 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1600 mm | 1783 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1380 mm | 1448 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2320 mm | 2639 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 65 L | 60 L |