1980 Oldsmobile Cutlass vs. 2003 Volvo V70
To start off, 2003 Volvo V70 is newer by 23 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1980 Oldsmobile Cutlass. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1980 Oldsmobile Cutlass would be higher. At 3,790 cc (6 cylinders), 1980 Oldsmobile Cutlass is equipped with a bigger engine.
Because 1980 Oldsmobile Cutlass 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 Oldsmobile Cutlass. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2003 Volvo V70, 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. 1980 Oldsmobile Cutlass has automatic transmission and 2003 Volvo V70 has manual transmission. 2003 Volvo V70 will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 1980 Oldsmobile Cutlass will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
1980 Oldsmobile Cutlass | 2003 Volvo V70 | |
Make | Oldsmobile | Volvo |
Model | Cutlass | V70 |
Year Released | 1980 | 2003 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3790 cc | 2521 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 5 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 0 HP | 138 HP |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Transmission Type | Automatic | Manual |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
Vehicle Weight | 1480 kg | 1480 kg |
Vehicle Length | 5030 mm | 4520 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1830 mm | 1810 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1380 mm | 1460 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2760 mm | 2760 mm |