2002 Chevrolet Camaro vs. 2006 Volvo V50
To start off, 2006 Volvo V50 is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2002 Chevrolet Camaro. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2002 Chevrolet Camaro would be higher. At 5,700 cc (8 cylinders), 2002 Chevrolet Camaro is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2002 Chevrolet Camaro weights approximately 475 kg more than 2006 Volvo V50.
Because 2006 Volvo V50 is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2002 Chevrolet Camaro. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2006 Volvo V50 will offer significantly more control. 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 (461 Nm) has 141 more torque (in Nm) than 2006 Volvo V50. (320 Nm). This means 2002 Chevrolet Camaro will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2006 Volvo V50.
Compare all specifications:
| 2002 Chevrolet Camaro | 2006 Volvo V50 | |
| Make | Chevrolet | Volvo |
| Model | Camaro | V50 |
| Year Released | 2002 | 2006 |
| Body Type | Coupe | Station Wagon |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 5700 cc | 2522 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 5 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 218 HP |
| Torque | 461 Nm | 320 Nm |
| Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 2100 kg | 1625 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4920 mm | 4520 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1890 mm | 1780 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1310 mm | 1460 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2650 mm | 2650 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 64 L | 60 L |
