1951 Cadillac 62 vs. 2003 Daewoo Matiz
To start off, 2003 Daewoo Matiz is newer by 52 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, 1951 Cadillac 62 (160 HP @ 3800 RPM) has 97 more horse power than 2003 Daewoo Matiz. (63 HP @ 5400 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1951 Cadillac 62 should accelerate faster than 2003 Daewoo Matiz. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1951 Cadillac 62 weights approximately 927 kg more than 2003 Daewoo Matiz. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
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, 2003 Daewoo Matiz, 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 336 more torque (in Nm) than 2003 Daewoo Matiz. (87 Nm @ 4200 RPM). This means 1951 Cadillac 62 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2003 Daewoo Matiz.
Compare all specifications:
| 1951 Cadillac 62 | 2003 Daewoo Matiz | |
| Make | Cadillac | Daewoo |
| Model | 62 | Matiz |
| Year Released | 1951 | 2003 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 5422 cc | 994 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 160 HP | 63 HP |
| Engine RPM | 3800 RPM | 5400 RPM |
| Torque | 423 Nm | 87 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 1800 RPM | 4200 RPM |
| Engine Bore Size | 96.8 mm | 68.5 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 92.1 mm | 67.5 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 6.7:1 | 9.3:1 |
| Top Speed | 145 km/hour | 152 km/hour |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 1752 kg | 825 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5480 mm | 3500 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 2050 mm | 1500 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1600 mm | 1490 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3210 mm | 2350 mm |
