2008 Citroen C3 vs. 1986 Volvo 242
To start off, 2008 Citroen C3 is newer by 22 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1986 Volvo 242. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1986 Volvo 242 would be higher. At 1,986 cc (4 cylinders), 1986 Volvo 242 is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1986 Volvo 242 weights approximately 210 kg more than 2008 Citroen C3.
Because 1986 Volvo 242 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 1986 Volvo 242. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2008 Citroen C3, 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, 1986 Volvo 242 (157 Nm @ 3200 RPM) has 39 more torque (in Nm) than 2008 Citroen C3. (118 Nm @ 3300 RPM). This means 1986 Volvo 242 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2008 Citroen C3.
Compare all specifications:
2008 Citroen C3 | 1986 Volvo 242 | |
Make | Citroen | Volvo |
Model | C3 | 242 |
Year Released | 2008 | 1986 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1360 cc | 1986 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 0 HP | 97 HP |
Torque | 118 Nm | 157 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3300 RPM | 3200 RPM |
Engine Bore Size | 75.1 mm | 82.7 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 77 mm | 93 mm |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Front | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Vehicle Weight | 1080 kg | 1290 kg |
Vehicle Length | 3860 mm | 4790 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1670 mm | 1730 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1540 mm | 1440 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2470 mm | 2660 mm |