2006 Chevrolet HHR vs. 1980 Volvo 265
To start off, 2006 Chevrolet HHR is newer by 26 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1980 Volvo 265. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1980 Volvo 265 would be higher. At 2,849 cc (6 cylinders), 1980 Volvo 265 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1980 Volvo 265 (153 HP @ 5500 RPM) has 10 more horse power than 2006 Chevrolet HHR. (143 HP @ 6000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1980 Volvo 265 should accelerate faster than 2006 Chevrolet HHR.
Because 1980 Volvo 265 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 1980 Volvo 265. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2006 Chevrolet HHR, 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, 1980 Volvo 265 (230 Nm @ 3000 RPM) has 27 more torque (in Nm) than 2006 Chevrolet HHR. (203 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 1980 Volvo 265 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2006 Chevrolet HHR.
Compare all specifications:
2006 Chevrolet HHR | 1980 Volvo 265 | |
Make | Chevrolet | Volvo |
Model | HHR | 265 |
Year Released | 2006 | 1980 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2196 cc | 2849 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Horse Power | 143 HP | 153 HP |
Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 5500 RPM |
Torque | 203 Nm | 230 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4000 RPM | 3000 RPM |
Engine Bore Size | 86 mm | 91.1 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 94 mm | 73 mm |
Drive Type | Front | Rear |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Vehicle Length | 4480 mm | 4890 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1760 mm | 1720 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1610 mm | 1450 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2640 mm | 2660 mm |