2004 Spyker C8 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 Spyker C8. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Spyker C8 would be higher. At 3,999 cc, 2004 Spyker C8 is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2010 Volvo XC60 weights approximately 470 kg more than 2004 Spyker C8.
Because 2004 Spyker C8 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 Spyker C8. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2010 Volvo XC60, 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.
Compare all specifications:
| 2004 Spyker C8 | 2010 Volvo XC60 | |
| Make | Spyker | Volvo |
| Model | C8 | XC60 |
| Year Released | 2004 | 2010 |
| Body Type | Convertible | SUV |
| Engine Position | Middle | Front |
| Engine Size | 3999 cc | 3200 cc |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 235 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1350 kg | 1820 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4590 mm | 4628 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1930 mm | 1890 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1260 mm | 1712 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2680 mm | 2774 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 100 L | 70 L |
