1958 Cadillac 62 vs. 1999 Chevrolet Malibu
To start off, 1999 Chevrolet Malibu is newer by 41 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, 1958 Cadillac 62 (190 HP @ 4800 RPM) has 40 more horse power than 1999 Chevrolet Malibu. (150 HP @ 5600 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1958 Cadillac 62 should accelerate faster than 1999 Chevrolet Malibu. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1958 Cadillac 62 weights approximately 699 kg more than 1999 Chevrolet Malibu. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
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, 1999 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:
1958 Cadillac 62 | 1999 Chevrolet Malibu | |
Make | Cadillac | Chevrolet |
Model | 62 | Malibu |
Year Released | 1958 | 1999 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 5980 cc | 2392 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 190 HP | 150 HP |
Engine RPM | 4800 RPM | 5600 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Vehicle Weight | 2085 kg | 1386 kg |
Vehicle Length | 5520 mm | 4850 mm |
Vehicle Width | 2040 mm | 1770 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1590 mm | 1440 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3300 mm | 2760 mm |