1951 Cadillac 62 vs. 2001 Mercedes-Benz C
To start off, 2001 Mercedes-Benz C is newer by 50 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, 2001 Mercedes-Benz C (161 HP @ 4200 RPM) has 1 more horse power than 1951 Cadillac 62. (160 HP @ 3800 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2001 Mercedes-Benz C should accelerate faster than 1951 Cadillac 62. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2001 Mercedes-Benz C weights approximately 298 kg more than 1951 Cadillac 62. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
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) has 237 more torque (in Nm) than 2001 Mercedes-Benz C. (186 Nm). This means 1951 Cadillac 62 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2001 Mercedes-Benz C.
Compare all specifications:
1951 Cadillac 62 | 2001 Mercedes-Benz C | |
Make | Cadillac | Mercedes-Benz |
Model | 62 | C |
Year Released | 1951 | 2001 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 5422 cc | 3201 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Horse Power | 160 HP | 161 HP |
Engine RPM | 3800 RPM | 4200 RPM |
Torque | 423 Nm | 186 Nm |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Vehicle Weight | 1752 kg | 2050 kg |
Vehicle Length | 5480 mm | 4540 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3210 mm | 2720 mm |