2009 Mazda CX-9 vs. 1962 Volvo 120
To start off, 2009 Mazda CX-9 is newer by 47 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1962 Volvo 120. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1962 Volvo 120 would be higher. At 3,727 cc (6 cylinders), 2009 Mazda CX-9 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Mazda CX-9 (268 HP) has 201 more horse power than 1962 Volvo 120. (67 HP). In normal driving conditions, 2009 Mazda CX-9 should accelerate faster than 1962 Volvo 120.
Because 1962 Volvo 120 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 1962 Volvo 120. 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. Let's talk about torque, 2009 Mazda CX-9 (269 Nm @ 4250 RPM) has 125 more torque (in Nm) than 1962 Volvo 120. (144 Nm @ 2300 RPM). This means 2009 Mazda CX-9 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1962 Volvo 120.
Compare all specifications:
2009 Mazda CX-9 | 1962 Volvo 120 | |
Make | Mazda | Volvo |
Model | CX-9 | 120 |
Year Released | 2009 | 1962 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3727 cc | 1778 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
Horse Power | 268 HP | 67 HP |
Torque | 269 Nm | 144 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4250 RPM | 2300 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Front | Rear |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 5 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4600 mm | 4460 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1940 mm | 1620 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1730 mm | 1510 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2340 mm | 2610 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 76 L | 45 L |