1959 Cadillac 62 vs. 2004 Ford Mustang

To start off, 2004 Ford Mustang is newer by 45 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1959 Cadillac 62. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1959 Cadillac 62 would be higher. At 6,381 cc (8 cylinders), 1959 Cadillac 62 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Ford Mustang (435 HP @ 7000 RPM) has 110 more horse power than 1959 Cadillac 62. (325 HP @ 4800 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2004 Ford Mustang should accelerate faster than 1959 Cadillac 62.

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. Let's talk about torque, 1959 Cadillac 62 (583 Nm @ 3000 RPM) has 39 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 Ford Mustang. (544 Nm @ 5500 RPM). This means 1959 Cadillac 62 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 Ford Mustang. 1959 Cadillac 62 has automatic transmission and 2004 Ford Mustang has manual transmission. 2004 Ford Mustang will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 1959 Cadillac 62 will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.

Compare all specifications: