1950 Cadillac 62 vs. 2009 Kia Forte
To start off, 2009 Kia Forte is newer by 59 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1950 Cadillac 62. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1950 Cadillac 62 would be higher. At 5,425 cc (8 cylinders), 1950 Cadillac 62 is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1950 Cadillac 62 weights approximately 524 kg more than 2009 Kia Forte.
Because 1950 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 1950 Cadillac 62. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2009 Kia Forte, 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:
1950 Cadillac 62 | 2009 Kia Forte | |
Make | Cadillac | Kia |
Model | 62 | Forte |
Year Released | 1950 | 2009 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 5425 cc | 2000 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 0 HP | 156 HP |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Vehicle Weight | 1752 kg | 1228 kg |
Vehicle Width | 2040 mm | 1775 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3210 mm | 2649 mm |