1949 Cadillac 62 vs. 2004 Ford Ecosport
To start off, 2004 Ford Ecosport is newer by 55 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1949 Cadillac 62. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1949 Cadillac 62 would be higher. At 5,425 cc (8 cylinders), 1949 Cadillac 62 is equipped with a bigger engine.
Because 1949 Cadillac 62 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 1949 Cadillac 62. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2004 Ford Ecosport, 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.
Compare all specifications:
1949 Cadillac 62 | 2004 Ford Ecosport | |
Make | Cadillac | Ford |
Model | 62 | Ecosport |
Year Released | 1949 | 2004 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 5425 cc | 1600 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 0 HP | 109 HP |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Vehicle Width | 2040 mm | 1980 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3210 mm | 2490 mm |