1954 Cadillac 62 vs. 2009 Holden Commodore
To start off, 2009 Holden Commodore is newer by 55 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1954 Cadillac 62. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1954 Cadillac 62 would be higher. At 5,423 cc (8 cylinders), 1954 Cadillac 62 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1954 Cadillac 62 (267 HP) has 27 more horse power than 2009 Holden Commodore. (240 HP). In normal driving conditions, 1954 Cadillac 62 should accelerate faster than 2009 Holden Commodore.
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. 1954 Cadillac 62 has automatic transmission and 2009 Holden Commodore has manual transmission. 2009 Holden Commodore will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 1954 Cadillac 62 will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 1954 Cadillac 62 | 2009 Holden Commodore | |
| Make | Cadillac | Holden |
| Model | 62 | Commodore |
| Year Released | 1954 | 2009 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 5423 cc | 2564 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Horse Power | 267 HP | 240 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
