1951 Cadillac 62 vs. 1986 Holden Commodore
To start off, 1986 Holden Commodore is newer by 35 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1951 Cadillac 62. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1951 Cadillac 62 would be higher. At 5,422 cc (8 cylinders), 1951 Cadillac 62 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1986 Holden Commodore (201 HP @ 5600 RPM) has 41 more horse power than 1951 Cadillac 62. (160 HP @ 3800 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1986 Holden Commodore should accelerate faster than 1951 Cadillac 62. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1951 Cadillac 62 weights approximately 517 kg more than 1986 Holden Commodore.
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. Let's talk about torque, 1951 Cadillac 62 (423 Nm @ 1800 RPM) has 127 more torque (in Nm) than 1986 Holden Commodore. (296 Nm @ 3200 RPM). This means 1951 Cadillac 62 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1986 Holden Commodore.
Compare all specifications:
1951 Cadillac 62 | 1986 Holden Commodore | |
Make | Cadillac | Holden |
Model | 62 | Commodore |
Year Released | 1951 | 1986 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 5422 cc | 2962 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 160 HP | 201 HP |
Engine RPM | 3800 RPM | 5600 RPM |
Torque | 423 Nm | 296 Nm |
Torque RPM | 1800 RPM | 3200 RPM |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Vehicle Weight | 1752 kg | 1235 kg |
Vehicle Length | 5480 mm | 4770 mm |
Vehicle Width | 2050 mm | 1730 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1600 mm | 1380 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3210 mm | 2670 mm |