2009 Mazda 6 vs. 1985 Volvo 780
To start off, 2009 Mazda 6 is newer by 24 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1985 Volvo 780. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1985 Volvo 780 would be higher. At 2,487 cc (4 cylinders), 2009 Mazda 6 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Mazda 6 (168 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 41 more horse power than 1985 Volvo 780. (127 HP @ 4800 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2009 Mazda 6 should accelerate faster than 1985 Volvo 780.
Because 1985 Volvo 780 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 1985 Volvo 780. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2009 Mazda 6, 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, 1985 Volvo 780 (250 Nm @ 2400 RPM) has 83 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Mazda 6. (167 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 1985 Volvo 780 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Mazda 6.
Compare all specifications:
2009 Mazda 6 | 1985 Volvo 780 | |
Make | Mazda | Volvo |
Model | 6 | 780 |
Year Released | 2009 | 1985 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2487 cc | 2383 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
Horse Power | 168 HP | 127 HP |
Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 4800 RPM |
Torque | 167 Nm | 250 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4000 RPM | 2400 RPM |
Drive Type | Front | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Width | 1850 mm | 1760 mm |
Fuel Consumption | 8.1 L/100km | 8.2 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 11.8 L/100km | 9.5 L/100km |