1980 Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow vs. 2006 Volvo XC90
To start off, 2006 Volvo XC90 is newer by 26 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1980 Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1980 Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow would be higher. At 6,749 cc (8 cylinders), 1980 Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1980 Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow weights approximately 224 kg more than 2006 Volvo XC90.
Because 2006 Volvo XC90 is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1980 Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2006 Volvo XC90 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:
| 1980 Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow | 2006 Volvo XC90 | |
| Make | Rolls-Royce | Volvo |
| Model | Silver Shadow | XC90 |
| Year Released | 1980 | 2006 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 6749 cc | 3192 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 235 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline - Premium |
| Top Speed | 190 km/hour | 210 km/hour |
| Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 2206 kg | 1982 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5280 mm | 4810 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1810 mm | 1910 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1520 mm | 1750 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3040 mm | 2870 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 15.2 L/100km | 11.6 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 107 L | 80 L |
