1959 Cadillac 62 vs. 2004 Ford Ranger
To start off, 2004 Ford Ranger 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. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1959 Cadillac 62 weights approximately 498 kg more than 2004 Ford Ranger.
Because 2004 Ford Ranger is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1959 Cadillac 62. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2004 Ford Ranger 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. 1959 Cadillac 62 has automatic transmission and 2004 Ford Ranger has manual transmission. 2004 Ford Ranger 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:
| 1959 Cadillac 62 | 2004 Ford Ranger | |
| Make | Cadillac | Ford |
| Model | 62 | Ranger |
| Year Released | 1959 | 2004 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 6381 cc | 2300 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 325 HP | 0 HP |
| Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 2 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 2218 kg | 1720 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5720 mm | 5090 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 2040 mm | 1760 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1430 mm | 1750 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3310 mm | 3010 mm |
