1958 Cadillac 62 vs. 2003 Honda CR-V
To start off, 2003 Honda CR-V is newer by 45 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 30 more horse power than 2003 Honda CR-V. (160 HP @ 5700 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1958 Cadillac 62 should accelerate faster than 2003 Honda CR-V. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1958 Cadillac 62 weights approximately 607 kg more than 2003 Honda CR-V. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 2003 Honda CR-V is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1958 Cadillac 62. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2003 Honda CR-V will offer significantly more control. 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 | 2003 Honda CR-V | |
| Make | Cadillac | Honda |
| Model | 62 | CR-V |
| Year Released | 1958 | 2003 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 5980 cc | 2359 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 190 HP | 160 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4800 RPM | 5700 RPM |
| Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
| Vehicle Weight | 2085 kg | 1478 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5520 mm | 4540 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 2040 mm | 1790 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1590 mm | 1690 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3300 mm | 2630 mm |
