1957 Cadillac 62 vs. 1996 Chevrolet Malibu
To start off, 1996 Chevrolet Malibu is newer by 39 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1957 Cadillac 62. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1957 Cadillac 62 would be higher. At 5,424 cc (8 cylinders), 1957 Cadillac 62 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1957 Cadillac 62 (267 HP @ 4800 RPM) has 111 more horse power than 1996 Chevrolet Malibu. (156 HP @ 5200 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1957 Cadillac 62 should accelerate faster than 1996 Chevrolet Malibu. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1957 Cadillac 62 weights approximately 598 kg more than 1996 Chevrolet Malibu. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 1957 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 1957 Cadillac 62. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1996 Chevrolet Malibu, 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:
1957 Cadillac 62 | 1996 Chevrolet Malibu | |
Make | Cadillac | Chevrolet |
Model | 62 | Malibu |
Year Released | 1957 | 1996 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 5424 cc | 3135 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Horse Power | 267 HP | 156 HP |
Engine RPM | 4800 RPM | 5200 RPM |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Vehicle Weight | 2004 kg | 1406 kg |
Vehicle Length | 5510 mm | 4840 mm |
Vehicle Width | 2050 mm | 1770 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1590 mm | 1440 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3290 mm | 2750 mm |