1951 Cadillac 62 vs. 2009 Ford Ka
To start off, 2009 Ford Ka is newer by 58 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.
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, 2009 Ford Ka, 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.
Compare all specifications:
1951 Cadillac 62 | 2009 Ford Ka | |
Make | Cadillac | Ford |
Model | 62 | Ka |
Year Released | 1951 | 2009 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 5422 cc | 1297 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 160 HP | 0 HP |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
Vehicle Length | 5480 mm | 3660 mm |
Vehicle Width | 2050 mm | 1830 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1600 mm | 1420 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3210 mm | 2450 mm |