1978 Mazda RX-2 vs. 2012 Volvo XC60
To start off, 2012 Volvo XC60 is newer by 34 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1978 Mazda RX-2. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1978 Mazda RX-2 would be higher. At 2,290 cc, 1978 Mazda RX-2 is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2012 Volvo XC60 weights approximately 961 kg more than 1978 Mazda RX-2.
Because 2012 Volvo XC60 is all wheel drive (AWD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1978 Mazda RX-2. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2012 Volvo XC60 will offer significantly more control. 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:
1978 Mazda RX-2 | 2012 Volvo XC60 | |
Make | Mazda | Volvo |
Model | RX-2 | XC60 |
Year Released | 1978 | 2012 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2290 cc | 2000 cc |
Engine Type | dual-disk rotary | in-line |
Horse Power | 118 HP | 0 HP |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Diesel |
Drive Type | Rear | AWD |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Vehicle Weight | 960 kg | 1921 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4160 mm | 4628 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1590 mm | 1890 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1400 mm | 1712 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2480 mm | 2748 mm |