1978 Chrysler 160 vs. 2012 Volvo C30
To start off, 2012 Volvo C30 is newer by 34 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1978 Chrysler 160. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1978 Chrysler 160 would be higher. At 2,400 cc (4 cylinders), 2012 Volvo C30 is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2012 Volvo C30 weights approximately 366 kg more than 1978 Chrysler 160.
Because 1978 Chrysler 160 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 1978 Chrysler 160. 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. Let's talk about torque, 2012 Volvo C30 (350 Nm) has 217 more torque (in Nm) than 1978 Chrysler 160. (133 Nm). This means 2012 Volvo C30 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1978 Chrysler 160.
Compare all specifications:
1978 Chrysler 160 | 2012 Volvo C30 | |
Make | Chrysler | Volvo |
Model | 160 | C30 |
Year Released | 1978 | 2012 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1639 cc | 2400 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 89 HP | 0 HP |
Torque | 133 Nm | 350 Nm |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Diesel |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Vehicle Weight | 1085 kg | 1451 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4540 mm | 4252 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1730 mm | 1783 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1440 mm | 1448 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2680 mm | 2639 mm |