1982 Cadillac Cimarron vs. 2004 Volvo V40
To start off, 2004 Volvo V40 is newer by 22 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1982 Cadillac Cimarron. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1982 Cadillac Cimarron would be higher. At 2,844 cc (6 cylinders), 1982 Cadillac Cimarron is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Volvo V40 (169 HP @ 5200 RPM) has 46 more horse power than 1982 Cadillac Cimarron. (123 HP @ 4500 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2004 Volvo V40 should accelerate faster than 1982 Cadillac Cimarron. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2004 Volvo V40 weights approximately 128 kg more than 1982 Cadillac Cimarron. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Both vehicles are front wheel drive (FWD). Which offers better traction when its slippery than rear wheel drive vehicles. 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:
| 1982 Cadillac Cimarron | 2004 Volvo V40 | |
| Make | Cadillac | Volvo |
| Model | Cimarron | V40 |
| Year Released | 1982 | 2004 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Station Wagon |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2844 cc | 1950 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 123 HP | 169 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4500 RPM | 5200 RPM |
| Drive Type | Front | Front |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1152 kg | 1280 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4530 mm | 4530 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1660 mm | 1720 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2580 mm | 2570 mm |
