1959 Cadillac 62 vs. 2005 Volvo XC90
To start off, 2005 Volvo XC90 is newer by 46 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, 1959 Cadillac 62 (325 HP) has 57 more horse power than 2005 Volvo XC90. (268 HP). In normal driving conditions, 1959 Cadillac 62 should accelerate faster than 2005 Volvo XC90. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1959 Cadillac 62 weights approximately 780 kg more than 2005 Volvo XC90. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 2005 Volvo XC90 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, 2005 Volvo XC90 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. Let's talk about torque, 1959 Cadillac 62 (583 Nm @ 3000 RPM) has 202 more torque (in Nm) than 2005 Volvo XC90. (381 Nm @ 1800 RPM). This means 1959 Cadillac 62 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2005 Volvo XC90.
Compare all specifications:
| 1959 Cadillac 62 | 2005 Volvo XC90 | |
| Make | Cadillac | Volvo |
| Model | 62 | XC90 |
| Year Released | 1959 | 2005 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 6381 cc | 2922 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 325 HP | 268 HP |
| Torque | 583 Nm | 381 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3000 RPM | 1800 RPM |
| Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 7 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 2218 kg | 1438 kg |
| Wheelbase Size | 3310 mm | 2720 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 75 L | 72 L |
