1990 Mazda 626 vs. 1981 Volvo 240
To start off, 1990 Mazda 626 is newer by 9 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1981 Volvo 240. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1981 Volvo 240 would be higher. At 2,383 cc (6 cylinders), 1981 Volvo 240 is equipped with a bigger engine.
Because 1981 Volvo 240 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 Volvo 240. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1990 Mazda 626, 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:
1990 Mazda 626 | 1981 Volvo 240 | |
Make | Mazda | Volvo |
Model | 626 | 240 |
Year Released | 1990 | 1981 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1789 cc | 2383 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 0 HP | 81 HP |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Diesel |
Drive Type | Front | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Doors | 5 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4600 mm | 4790 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1700 mm | 1730 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1440 mm | 1440 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2580 mm | 2660 mm |