1981 Mercury Cougar vs. 2009 Volvo C70
To start off, 2009 Volvo C70 is newer by 28 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1981 Mercury Cougar. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1981 Mercury Cougar would be higher. At 3,797 cc (6 cylinders), 1981 Mercury Cougar is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Volvo C70 (224 HP @ 5000 RPM) has 110 more horse power than 1981 Mercury Cougar. (114 HP @ 4000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Volvo C70 should accelerate faster than 1981 Mercury Cougar.
Because 1981 Mercury Cougar 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 1981 Mercury Cougar. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2009 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. Let's talk about torque, 1981 Mercury Cougar (237 Nm @ 2600 RPM) has 1 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Volvo C70. (236 Nm @ 1500 RPM). This means 1981 Mercury Cougar will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Volvo C70.
Compare all specifications:
| 1981 Mercury Cougar | 2009 Volvo C70 | |
| Make | Mercury | Volvo |
| Model | Cougar | C70 |
| Year Released | 1981 | 2009 |
| Body Type | Coupe | Coupe |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3797 cc | 2521 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 5 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 114 HP | 224 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4000 RPM | 5000 RPM |
| Torque | 237 Nm | 236 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2600 RPM | 1500 RPM |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Width | 1810 mm | 1840 mm |
