1959 Cadillac 62 vs. 2009 Land Rover LR2
To start off, 2009 Land Rover LR2 is newer by 50 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 @ 4800 RPM) has 98 more horse power than 2009 Land Rover LR2. (227 HP @ 6300 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1959 Cadillac 62 should accelerate faster than 2009 Land Rover LR2.
Because 2009 Land Rover LR2 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, 2009 Land Rover LR2 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 349 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Land Rover LR2. (234 Nm @ 3200 RPM). This means 1959 Cadillac 62 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Land Rover LR2.
Compare all specifications:
| 1959 Cadillac 62 | 2009 Land Rover LR2 | |
| Make | Cadillac | Land Rover |
| Model | 62 | LR2 |
| Year Released | 1959 | 2009 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 6381 cc | 3192 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 325 HP | 227 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4800 RPM | 6300 RPM |
| Torque | 583 Nm | 234 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3000 RPM | 3200 RPM |
| Engine Bore Size | 101.6 mm | 84 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 98.4 mm | 96 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 10.5:1 | 10.8:1 |
| Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Width | 2040 mm | 1910 mm |
