1996 Citroen ZX vs. 1962 Volvo P 1800
To start off, 1996 Citroen ZX is newer by 34 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1962 Volvo P 1800. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1962 Volvo P 1800 would be higher. At 1,905 cc (4 cylinders), 1996 Citroen ZX is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1962 Volvo P 1800 (89 HP @ 5500 RPM) has 22 more horse power than 1996 Citroen ZX. (67 HP @ 4600 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1962 Volvo P 1800 should accelerate faster than 1996 Citroen ZX.
Because 1962 Volvo P 1800 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 1962 Volvo P 1800. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1996 Citroen ZX, 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, 1962 Volvo P 1800 (147 Nm @ 3500 RPM) has 27 more torque (in Nm) than 1996 Citroen ZX. (120 Nm @ 2000 RPM). This means 1962 Volvo P 1800 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1996 Citroen ZX.
Compare all specifications:
1996 Citroen ZX | 1962 Volvo P 1800 | |
Make | Citroen | Volvo |
Model | ZX | P 1800 |
Year Released | 1996 | 1962 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1905 cc | 1778 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 67 HP | 89 HP |
Engine RPM | 4600 RPM | 5500 RPM |
Torque | 120 Nm | 147 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2000 RPM | 3500 RPM |
Fuel Type | Diesel | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Front | Rear |
Vehicle Weight | 1090 kg | 1090 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4270 mm | 4410 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1710 mm | 1680 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1460 mm | 1290 mm |