2000 Ford TS-50 vs. 1978 Volvo 260
To start off, 2000 Ford TS-50 is newer by 22 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1978 Volvo 260. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1978 Volvo 260 would be higher. At 2,664 cc (6 cylinders), 1978 Volvo 260 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1978 Volvo 260 (146 HP @ 5700 RPM) has 18 more horse power than 2000 Ford TS-50. (128 HP @ 6000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1978 Volvo 260 should accelerate faster than 2000 Ford TS-50. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1978 Volvo 260 weights approximately 142 kg more than 2000 Ford TS-50. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
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, 1978 Volvo 260 (219 Nm) has 44 more torque (in Nm) than 2000 Ford TS-50. (175 Nm). This means 1978 Volvo 260 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2000 Ford TS-50.
Compare all specifications:
| 2000 Ford TS-50 | 1978 Volvo 260 | |
| Make | Ford | Volvo |
| Model | TS-50 | 260 |
| Year Released | 2000 | 1978 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1989 cc | 2664 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Horse Power | 128 HP | 146 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 5700 RPM |
| Torque | 175 Nm | 219 Nm |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
| Vehicle Weight | 1208 kg | 1350 kg |
| Wheelbase Size | 2760 mm | 2660 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 132 L | 60 L |
