1980 Mazda 626 vs. 2006 Volvo C70
To start off, 2006 Volvo C70 is newer by 26 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1980 Mazda 626. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1980 Mazda 626 would be higher. At 2,435 cc (5 cylinders), 2006 Volvo C70 is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2006 Volvo C70 weights approximately 647 kg more than 1980 Mazda 626.
Because 1980 Mazda 626 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 Mazda 626. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2006 Volvo C70, 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. 2006 Volvo C70 has automatic transmission and 1980 Mazda 626 has manual transmission. 1980 Mazda 626 will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2006 Volvo C70 will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 1980 Mazda 626 | 2006 Volvo C70 | |
| Make | Mazda | Volvo |
| Model | 626 | C70 |
| Year Released | 1980 | 2006 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1586 cc | 2435 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 5 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 178 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Diesel |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 1045 kg | 1692 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4310 mm | 4720 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1670 mm | 1820 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1380 mm | 1440 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2520 mm | 2670 mm |
