2004 Mitsubishi eK vs. 2013 Volvo C30
To start off, 2013 Volvo C30 is newer by 9 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Mitsubishi eK. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Mitsubishi eK would be higher. At 2,500 cc (5 cylinders), 2013 Volvo C30 is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2013 Volvo C30 weights approximately 667 kg more than 2004 Mitsubishi eK.
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. 2004 Mitsubishi eK has automatic transmission and 2013 Volvo C30 has manual transmission. 2013 Volvo C30 will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2004 Mitsubishi eK will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 2004 Mitsubishi eK | 2013 Volvo C30 | |
| Make | Mitsubishi | Volvo |
| Model | eK | C30 |
| Year Released | 2004 | 2013 |
| Body Type | Hatchback | Coupe |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 657 cc | 2500 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 3 cylinders | 5 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 5 valves |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 224 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Front | Front |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 790 kg | 1457 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 3400 mm | 4266 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1480 mm | 2039 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1560 mm | 1447 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2350 mm | 2640 mm |
