1958 Cadillac 62 vs. 1996 Ford Taurus
To start off, 1996 Ford Taurus is newer by 38 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1958 Cadillac 62. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1958 Cadillac 62 would be higher. At 5,980 cc (8 cylinders), 1958 Cadillac 62 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1996 Ford Taurus (235 HP @ 6100 RPM) has 45 more horse power than 1958 Cadillac 62. (190 HP @ 4800 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1996 Ford Taurus should accelerate faster than 1958 Cadillac 62. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1958 Cadillac 62 weights approximately 493 kg more than 1996 Ford Taurus.
Because 1958 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 1958 Cadillac 62. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1996 Ford Taurus, 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:
1958 Cadillac 62 | 1996 Ford Taurus | |
Make | Cadillac | Ford |
Model | 62 | Taurus |
Year Released | 1958 | 1996 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 5980 cc | 3392 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 190 HP | 235 HP |
Engine RPM | 4800 RPM | 6100 RPM |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Vehicle Weight | 2085 kg | 1592 kg |
Vehicle Length | 5520 mm | 5040 mm |
Vehicle Width | 2040 mm | 1860 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1590 mm | 1420 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3300 mm | 2760 mm |