1996 Renault Clio vs. 1974 Volvo 140
To start off, 1996 Renault Clio is newer by 22 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1974 Volvo 140. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1974 Volvo 140 would be higher. At 3,000 cc (6 cylinders), 1996 Renault Clio is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1996 Renault Clio (250 HP) has 155 more horse power than 1974 Volvo 140. (95 HP). In normal driving conditions, 1996 Renault Clio should accelerate faster than 1974 Volvo 140.
Both vehicles are rear wheel drive (RWD) - it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, both vehicles do the job better than front wheel drive vehicles. 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, 1996 Renault Clio (407 Nm) has 260 more torque (in Nm) than 1974 Volvo 140. (147 Nm). This means 1996 Renault Clio will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1974 Volvo 140.
Compare all specifications:
| 1996 Renault Clio | 1974 Volvo 140 | |
| Make | Renault | Volvo |
| Model | Clio | 140 |
| Year Released | 1996 | 1974 |
| Engine Position | Middle | Front |
| Engine Size | 3000 cc | 1778 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 250 HP | 95 HP |
| Torque | 407 Nm | 147 Nm |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Width | 1640 mm | 1720 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1420 mm | 1450 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2490 mm | 2620 mm |
