1946 Cadillac 62 vs. 2000 Ford Mustang
To start off, 2000 Ford Mustang is newer by 54 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1946 Cadillac 62. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1946 Cadillac 62 would be higher. At 5,676 cc (8 cylinders), 1946 Cadillac 62 is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1946 Cadillac 62 weights approximately 568 kg more than 2000 Ford Mustang.
Both vehicles are rear wheel drive (RWD) - it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, both vehicles do the job better than front wheel drive vehicles. 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.
Compare all specifications:
| 1946 Cadillac 62 | 2000 Ford Mustang | |
| Make | Cadillac | Ford |
| Model | 62 | Mustang |
| Year Released | 1946 | 2000 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 5676 cc | 4600 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 130 HP |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 1866 kg | 1298 kg |
| Wheelbase Size | 3280 mm | 2580 mm |
