1982 Volvo 260 vs. 2010 Cadillac BLS

To start off, 2010 Cadillac BLS is newer by 28 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1982 Volvo 260. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1982 Volvo 260 would be higher. At 2,849 cc (6 cylinders), 1982 Volvo 260 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2010 Cadillac BLS (176 HP @ 5500 RPM) has 23 more horse power than 1982 Volvo 260. (153 HP @ 5500 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Cadillac BLS should accelerate faster than 1982 Volvo 260. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2010 Cadillac BLS weights approximately 196 kg more than 1982 Volvo 260. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.

Because 1982 Volvo 260 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 1982 Volvo 260. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2010 Cadillac BLS, 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, 2010 Cadillac BLS (265 Nm @ 2500 RPM) has 35 more torque (in Nm) than 1982 Volvo 260. (230 Nm @ 3000 RPM). This means 2010 Cadillac BLS will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1982 Volvo 260.

Compare all specifications: