2000 AC Aceca vs. 2012 Volvo XC70
To start off, 2012 Volvo XC70 is newer by 12 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2000 AC Aceca. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2000 AC Aceca would be higher. At 3,504 cc (8 cylinders), 2000 AC Aceca is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2012 Volvo XC70 weights approximately 270 kg more than 2000 AC Aceca.
Because 2012 Volvo XC70 is all wheel drive (AWD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2000 AC Aceca. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2012 Volvo XC70 will offer significantly more control. 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, both vehicles can yield 400 Nm of torque. So under normal driving conditions, the ability to climb up hills and pull heavy equipment should be relatively similar for both vehicles.
Compare all specifications:
2000 AC Aceca | 2012 Volvo XC70 | |
Make | AC | Volvo |
Model | Aceca | XC70 |
Year Released | 2000 | 2012 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3504 cc | 2000 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 5 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 346 HP | 0 HP |
Torque | 400 Nm | 400 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4000 RPM | 1400 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Diesel |
Drive Type | Rear | AWD |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1610 kg | 1880 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4640 mm | 4838 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1860 mm | 1862 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1350 mm | 1604 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2300 mm | 2815 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 90 L | 70 L |