2002 Chevrolet Camaro vs. 1995 Volvo 960
To start off, 2002 Chevrolet Camaro is newer by 7 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1995 Volvo 960. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1995 Volvo 960 would be higher. At 5,700 cc (8 cylinders), 2002 Chevrolet Camaro is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2002 Chevrolet Camaro (320 HP) has 152 more horse power than 1995 Volvo 960. (168 HP). In normal driving conditions, 2002 Chevrolet Camaro should accelerate faster than 1995 Volvo 960.
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, 2002 Chevrolet Camaro (454 Nm) has 221 more torque (in Nm) than 1995 Volvo 960. (233 Nm). This means 2002 Chevrolet Camaro will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1995 Volvo 960.
Compare all specifications:
| 2002 Chevrolet Camaro | 1995 Volvo 960 | |
| Make | Chevrolet | Volvo |
| Model | Camaro | 960 |
| Year Released | 2002 | 1995 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 5700 cc | 2473 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 320 HP | 168 HP |
| Torque | 454 Nm | 233 Nm |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 1500 kg | 1500 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4910 mm | 4880 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1890 mm | 1750 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1310 mm | 1420 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2570 mm | 2780 mm |
