1951 Cadillac 62 vs. 2009 Holden Commodore
To start off, 2009 Holden Commodore 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 5,976 cc (8 cylinders), 2009 Holden Commodore is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Holden Commodore (360 HP) has 200 more horse power than 1951 Cadillac 62. (160 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Holden Commodore should accelerate faster than 1951 Cadillac 62.
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 133 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Holden Commodore. (290 Nm). This means 1951 Cadillac 62 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Holden Commodore.
Compare all specifications:
| 1951 Cadillac 62 | 2009 Holden Commodore | |
| Make | Cadillac | Holden |
| Model | 62 | Commodore |
| Year Released | 1951 | 2009 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 5422 cc | 5976 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Horse Power | 160 HP | 360 HP |
| Torque | 423 Nm | 290 Nm |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
