2006 Volvo S60 vs. 1982 Mazda 626
To start off, 2006 Volvo S60 is newer by 24 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1982 Mazda 626. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1982 Mazda 626 would be higher. At 2,399 cc (5 cylinders), 2006 Volvo S60 is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2006 Volvo S60 weights approximately 497 kg more than 1982 Mazda 626.
Because 1982 Mazda 626 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 1982 Mazda 626. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2006 Volvo S60, 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. 1982 Mazda 626 has automatic transmission and 2006 Volvo S60 has manual transmission. 2006 Volvo S60 will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 1982 Mazda 626 will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
2006 Volvo S60 | 1982 Mazda 626 | |
Make | Volvo | Mazda |
Model | S60 | 626 |
Year Released | 2006 | 1982 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2399 cc | 1586 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 5 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 256 HP | 0 HP |
Fuel Type | Gasoline - Premium | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Front | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | Automatic |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Vehicle Weight | 1542 kg | 1045 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4580 mm | 4310 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1810 mm | 1670 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1430 mm | 1380 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2720 mm | 2520 mm |