1986 Mazda 929 vs. 2000 Volvo S40
To start off, 2000 Volvo S40 is newer by 14 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1986 Mazda 929. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1986 Mazda 929 would be higher. At 1,997 cc (6 cylinders), 1986 Mazda 929 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2000 Volvo S40 (197 HP @ 5500 RPM) has 52 more horse power than 1986 Mazda 929. (145 HP @ 5000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2000 Volvo S40 should accelerate faster than 1986 Mazda 929.
Because 1986 Mazda 929 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 1986 Mazda 929. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2000 Volvo S40, 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, 2000 Volvo S40 (300 Nm @ 2500 RPM) has 70 more torque (in Nm) than 1986 Mazda 929. (230 Nm @ 2500 RPM). This means 2000 Volvo S40 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1986 Mazda 929.
Compare all specifications:
| 1986 Mazda 929 | 2000 Volvo S40 | |
| Make | Mazda | Volvo |
| Model | 929 | S40 |
| Year Released | 1986 | 2000 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1997 cc | 1946 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 145 HP | 197 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5000 RPM | 5500 RPM |
| Torque | 230 Nm | 300 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2500 RPM | 2500 RPM |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4930 mm | 4520 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1730 mm | 1720 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1390 mm | 1430 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2720 mm | 2650 mm |
