2004 Mazda 6 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 Mazda 6. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Mazda 6 would be higher. At 1,798 cc (4 cylinders), 2004 Mazda 6 is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2010 Volvo C30 weights approximately 31 kg more than 2004 Mazda 6.
Both vehicles are front wheel drive (FWD). Which offers better traction when its slippery than rear 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.
Compare all specifications:
| 2004 Mazda 6 | 2010 Volvo C30 | |
| Make | Mazda | Volvo |
| Model | 6 | C30 |
| Year Released | 2004 | 2010 |
| Body Type | Station Wagon | Hatchback |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1798 cc | 1600 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 119 HP | 0 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Diesel |
| Drive Type | Front | Front |
| Transmission Type | Manual | 6-speed manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 3 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1420 kg | 1451 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4690 mm | 4252 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1790 mm | 1783 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1440 mm | 1448 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2680 mm | 2639 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 64 L | 60 L |
