2000 Citroen Xsara vs. 1976 Volvo 66
To start off, 2000 Citroen Xsara is newer by 24 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1976 Volvo 66. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1976 Volvo 66 would be higher. At 1,586 cc (4 cylinders), 2000 Citroen Xsara is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2000 Citroen Xsara (108 HP @ 5750 RPM) has 52 more horse power than 1976 Volvo 66. (56 HP @ 5400 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2000 Citroen Xsara should accelerate faster than 1976 Volvo 66.
Because 1976 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 1976 Volvo 66. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2000 Citroen Xsara, 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 Citroen Xsara (147 Nm @ 4000 RPM) has 53 more torque (in Nm) than 1976 Volvo 66. (94 Nm @ 2800 RPM). This means 2000 Citroen Xsara will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1976 Volvo 66.
Compare all specifications:
2000 Citroen Xsara | 1976 Volvo 66 | |
Make | Citroen | Volvo |
Model | Xsara | 66 |
Year Released | 2000 | 1976 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1586 cc | 1289 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 108 HP | 56 HP |
Engine RPM | 5750 RPM | 5400 RPM |
Torque | 147 Nm | 94 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4000 RPM | 2800 RPM |
Engine Bore Size | 78.5 mm | 73 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 82 mm | 77 mm |
Drive Type | Front | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Vehicle Length | 4190 mm | 3910 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1710 mm | 1550 mm |