2004 Ford Mustang vs. 2010 Volvo C30
To start off, 2010 Volvo C30 is newer by 6 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Ford Mustang. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Ford Mustang would be higher. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2004 Ford Mustang weights approximately 67 kg more than 2010 Volvo C30.
Because 2004 Ford Mustang 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 2004 Ford Mustang. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2010 Volvo C30, 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, 2004 Ford Mustang (410 Nm) has 60 more torque (in Nm) than 2010 Volvo C30. (350 Nm). This means 2004 Ford Mustang will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2010 Volvo C30.
Compare all specifications:
| 2004 Ford Mustang | 2010 Volvo C30 | |
| Make | Ford | Volvo |
| Model | Mustang | C30 |
| Year Released | 2004 | 2010 |
| Body Type | Coupe | Hatchback |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 261 HP | 0 HP |
| Torque | 410 Nm | 350 Nm |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 3 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1518 kg | 1451 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4660 mm | 4252 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1860 mm | 1783 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1360 mm | 1448 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2580 mm | 2639 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 59 L | 60 L |
