2000 Chevrolet Camaro vs. 1983 Volvo 240
To start off, 2000 Chevrolet Camaro is newer by 17 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1983 Volvo 240. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1983 Volvo 240 would be higher. At 5,670 cc (8 cylinders), 2000 Chevrolet Camaro is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2000 Chevrolet Camaro weights approximately 250 kg more than 1983 Volvo 240.
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, 2000 Chevrolet Camaro (468 Nm) has 311 more torque (in Nm) than 1983 Volvo 240. (157 Nm). This means 2000 Chevrolet Camaro will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1983 Volvo 240.
Compare all specifications:
| 2000 Chevrolet Camaro | 1983 Volvo 240 | |
| Make | Chevrolet | Volvo |
| Model | Camaro | 240 |
| Year Released | 2000 | 1983 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 5670 cc | 1986 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 96 HP |
| Torque | 468 Nm | 157 Nm |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Vehicle Weight | 1540 kg | 1290 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4910 mm | 4790 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1890 mm | 1730 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1330 mm | 1440 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2570 mm | 2660 mm |
