2009 Mazda CX-9 vs. 1948 Volvo PV 60

To start off, 2009 Mazda CX-9 is newer by 61 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1948 Volvo PV 60. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1948 Volvo PV 60 would be higher. At 3,726 cc (6 cylinders), 2009 Mazda CX-9 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Mazda CX-9 (273 HP @ 6250 RPM) has 188 more horse power than 1948 Volvo PV 60. (85 HP @ 3400 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2009 Mazda CX-9 should accelerate faster than 1948 Volvo PV 60. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1948 Volvo PV 60 weights approximately 301 kg more than 2009 Mazda CX-9.

Because 1948 Volvo PV 60 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 1948 Volvo PV 60. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2009 Mazda CX-9, 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. 2009 Mazda CX-9 has automatic transmission and 1948 Volvo PV 60 has manual transmission. 1948 Volvo PV 60 will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2009 Mazda CX-9 will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.

Compare all specifications: