1958 Cadillac 62 vs. 2004 Chevrolet Tracker
To start off, 2004 Chevrolet Tracker is newer by 46 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 93 more horse power than 2004 Chevrolet Tracker. (97 HP @ 5200 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1958 Cadillac 62 should accelerate faster than 2004 Chevrolet Tracker. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1958 Cadillac 62 weights approximately 767 kg more than 2004 Chevrolet Tracker. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
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.
Compare all specifications:
1958 Cadillac 62 | 2004 Chevrolet Tracker | |
Make | Cadillac | Chevrolet |
Model | 62 | Tracker |
Year Released | 1958 | 2004 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 5980 cc | 1590 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 190 HP | 97 HP |
Engine RPM | 4800 RPM | 5200 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Vehicle Weight | 2085 kg | 1318 kg |
Vehicle Length | 5520 mm | 4140 mm |
Vehicle Width | 2040 mm | 1720 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1590 mm | 1670 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3300 mm | 2210 mm |