1951 Cadillac 62 vs. 2003 Mitsubishi Outlander
To start off, 2003 Mitsubishi Outlander 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 26 more horse power than 2003 Mitsubishi Outlander. (134 HP @ 6000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1951 Cadillac 62 should accelerate faster than 2003 Mitsubishi Outlander. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1951 Cadillac 62 weights approximately 162 kg more than 2003 Mitsubishi Outlander. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 2003 Mitsubishi Outlander is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1951 Cadillac 62. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2003 Mitsubishi Outlander will offer significantly more control. 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 247 more torque (in Nm) than 2003 Mitsubishi Outlander. (176 Nm @ 4500 RPM). This means 1951 Cadillac 62 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2003 Mitsubishi Outlander.
Compare all specifications:
| 1951 Cadillac 62 | 2003 Mitsubishi Outlander | |
| Make | Cadillac | Mitsubishi |
| Model | 62 | Outlander |
| Year Released | 1951 | 2003 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 5422 cc | 1997 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 160 HP | 134 HP |
| Engine RPM | 3800 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Torque | 423 Nm | 176 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 1800 RPM | 4500 RPM |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 6.7:1 | 10.0:1 |
| Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
| Vehicle Weight | 1752 kg | 1590 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5480 mm | 4560 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 2050 mm | 1760 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1600 mm | 1680 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3210 mm | 2640 mm |
