1998 Citroen Saxo vs. 1980 Volvo 66
To start off, 1998 Citroen Saxo is newer by 18 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1980 Volvo 66. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1980 Volvo 66 would be higher. At 1,287 cc (4 cylinders), 1980 Volvo 66 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1980 Volvo 66 (56 HP @ 5100 RPM) has 7 more horse power than 1998 Citroen Saxo. (49 HP @ 6000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1980 Volvo 66 should accelerate faster than 1998 Citroen Saxo.
Because 1980 Volvo 66 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 1980 Volvo 66. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1998 Citroen Saxo, 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, 1980 Volvo 66 (94 Nm @ 2800 RPM) has 20 more torque (in Nm) than 1998 Citroen Saxo. (74 Nm @ 3700 RPM). This means 1980 Volvo 66 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1998 Citroen Saxo.
Compare all specifications:
1998 Citroen Saxo | 1980 Volvo 66 | |
Make | Citroen | Volvo |
Model | Saxo | 66 |
Year Released | 1998 | 1980 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 954 cc | 1287 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 49 HP | 56 HP |
Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 5100 RPM |
Torque | 74 Nm | 94 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3700 RPM | 2800 RPM |
Engine Bore Size | 70 mm | 73 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 62 mm | 77 mm |
Engine Compression Ratio | 9.4:1 | 8.5:1 |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Front | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Vehicle Length | 3730 mm | 3910 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1630 mm | 1550 mm |