1951 Cadillac 62 vs. 1997 Oldsmobile SS
To start off, 1997 Oldsmobile SS is newer by 46 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, 1997 Oldsmobile SS (202 HP @ 5200 RPM) has 42 more horse power than 1951 Cadillac 62. (160 HP @ 3800 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1997 Oldsmobile SS should accelerate faster than 1951 Cadillac 62.
Because 1951 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 1951 Cadillac 62. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1997 Oldsmobile SS, 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. Let's talk about torque, 1951 Cadillac 62 (423 Nm @ 1800 RPM) has 105 more torque (in Nm) than 1997 Oldsmobile SS. (318 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 1951 Cadillac 62 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1997 Oldsmobile SS.
Compare all specifications:
| 1951 Cadillac 62 | 1997 Oldsmobile SS | |
| Make | Cadillac | Oldsmobile |
| Model | 62 | SS |
| Year Released | 1951 | 1997 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 5422 cc | 3789 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Horse Power | 160 HP | 202 HP |
| Engine RPM | 3800 RPM | 5200 RPM |
| Torque | 423 Nm | 318 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 1800 RPM | 4000 RPM |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
| Vehicle Length | 5480 mm | 5130 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 2050 mm | 1900 mm |
