2004 Mazda 2 vs. 2010 Volvo XC60
To start off, 2010 Volvo XC60 is newer by 6 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Mazda 2. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Mazda 2 would be higher. At 2,000 cc (5 cylinders), 2010 Volvo XC60 is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2010 Volvo XC60 weights approximately 766 kg more than 2004 Mazda 2.
Because 2010 Volvo XC60 is all wheel drive (AWD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2004 Mazda 2. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2010 Volvo XC60 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. 2010 Volvo XC60 has automatic transmission and 2004 Mazda 2 has manual transmission. 2004 Mazda 2 will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2010 Volvo XC60 will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 2004 Mazda 2 | 2010 Volvo XC60 | |
| Make | Mazda | Volvo |
| Model | 2 | XC60 |
| Year Released | 2004 | 2010 |
| Body Type | Hatchback | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1560 cc | 2000 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 5 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 99 HP | 0 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline - Premium | Diesel |
| Drive Type | Front | AWD |
| Transmission Type | Manual | 6-speed shiftable automatic |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1155 kg | 1921 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 3930 mm | 4628 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1690 mm | 1890 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1550 mm | 1712 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2620 mm | 2748 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 45 L | 70 L |
