2000 Chrysler ESX 3 vs. 1974 Volvo 140
To start off, 2000 Chrysler ESX 3 is newer by 26 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 2,127 cc (4 cylinders), 1974 Volvo 140 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1974 Volvo 140 (123 HP @ 5500 RPM) has 49 more horse power than 2000 Chrysler ESX 3. (74 HP @ 6400 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1974 Volvo 140 should accelerate faster than 2000 Chrysler ESX 3.
Because 1974 Volvo 140 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 1974 Volvo 140. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2000 Chrysler ESX 3, 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, 2000 Chrysler ESX 3 (332 Nm) has 162 more torque (in Nm) than 1974 Volvo 140. (170 Nm). This means 2000 Chrysler ESX 3 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1974 Volvo 140.
Compare all specifications:
| 2000 Chrysler ESX 3 | 1974 Volvo 140 | |
| Make | Chrysler | Volvo |
| Model | ESX 3 | 140 |
| Year Released | 2000 | 1974 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1499 cc | 2127 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 74 HP | 123 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6400 RPM | 5500 RPM |
| Torque | 332 Nm | 170 Nm |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4910 mm | 4900 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1890 mm | 1720 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1400 mm | 1450 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3000 mm | 2620 mm |
