1980 Volvo 66 vs. 2012 Mazda 3
To start off, 2012 Mazda 3 is newer by 32 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1980 Volvo 66. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1980 Volvo 66 would be higher. At 2,500 cc (4 cylinders), 2012 Mazda 3 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2012 Mazda 3 (167 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 111 more horse power than 1980 Volvo 66. (56 HP @ 5100 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2012 Mazda 3 should accelerate faster than 1980 Volvo 66.
Because 1980 Volvo 66 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 Volvo 66. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2012 Mazda 3, 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 Mazda 3 (228 Nm @ 4000 RPM) has 134 more torque (in Nm) than 1980 Volvo 66. (94 Nm @ 2800 RPM). This means 2012 Mazda 3 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1980 Volvo 66.
Compare all specifications:
| 1980 Volvo 66 | 2012 Mazda 3 | |
| Make | Volvo | Mazda |
| Model | 66 | 3 |
| Year Released | 1980 | 2012 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1287 cc | 2500 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 56 HP | 167 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5100 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Torque | 94 Nm | 228 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2800 RPM | 4000 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Transmission Type | Manual | 6-speed manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Length | 3910 mm | 4506 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1550 mm | 1755 mm |
