2000 Chrysler ESX 3 vs. 2009 Volvo C30
To start off, 2009 Volvo C30 is newer by 9 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2000 Chrysler ESX 3. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2000 Chrysler ESX 3 would be higher. At 1,560 cc (4 cylinders), 2009 Volvo C30 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Volvo C30 (108 HP @ 4000 RPM) has 34 more horse power than 2000 Chrysler ESX 3. (74 HP @ 6400 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Volvo C30 should accelerate faster than 2000 Chrysler ESX 3.
Both vehicles are front wheel drive (FWD). Which offers better traction when its slippery than rear 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 Chrysler ESX 3 (332 Nm) has 92 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Volvo C30. (240 Nm). This means 2000 Chrysler ESX 3 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Volvo C30.
Compare all specifications:
2000 Chrysler ESX 3 | 2009 Volvo C30 | |
Make | Chrysler | Volvo |
Model | ESX 3 | C30 |
Year Released | 2000 | 2009 |
Body Type | Sedan | Hatchback |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1499 cc | 1560 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 74 HP | 108 HP |
Engine RPM | 6400 RPM | 4000 RPM |
Torque | 332 Nm | 240 Nm |
Drive Type | Front | Front |
Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 4 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 3 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4910 mm | 4260 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1890 mm | 1830 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1400 mm | 1440 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3000 mm | 2650 mm |