1985 Ford RS 200 vs. 2012 Volvo C30
To start off, 2012 Volvo C30 is newer by 27 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1985 Ford RS 200. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1985 Ford RS 200 would be higher. At 2,000 cc (4 cylinders), 2012 Volvo C30 is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2012 Volvo C30 weights approximately 271 kg more than 1985 Ford RS 200.
Because 1985 Ford RS 200 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 1985 Ford RS 200. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2012 Volvo C30, 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.
Compare all specifications:
| 1985 Ford RS 200 | 2012 Volvo C30 | |
| Make | Ford | Volvo |
| Model | RS 200 | C30 |
| Year Released | 1985 | 2012 |
| Body Type | Coupe | Hatchback |
| Engine Position | Middle | Front |
| Engine Size | 1804 cc | 2000 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 247 HP | 0 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Transmission Type | Manual | 6-speed manual |
| Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 3 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1180 kg | 1451 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4000 mm | 4252 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1770 mm | 1783 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1330 mm | 1448 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2520 mm | 2639 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 116 L | 60 L |
