1950 Cadillac 62 vs. 2011 Volkswagen Polo
To start off, 2011 Volkswagen Polo is newer by 61 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 685 kg more than 2011 Volkswagen Polo.
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, 2011 Volkswagen Polo, 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 | 2011 Volkswagen Polo | |
| Make | Cadillac | Volkswagen |
| Model | 62 | Polo |
| Year Released | 1950 | 2011 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 5425 cc | 1200 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 3 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 69 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 1752 kg | 1067 kg |
| Vehicle Width | 2040 mm | 1682 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3210 mm | 2470 mm |
