1959 Cadillac 62 vs. 2010 Daihatsu Sirion
To start off, 2010 Daihatsu Sirion is newer by 51 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 256 more horse power than 2010 Daihatsu Sirion. (69 HP @ 6000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1959 Cadillac 62 should accelerate faster than 2010 Daihatsu Sirion.
Because 2010 Daihatsu Sirion 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, 2010 Daihatsu Sirion 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 489 more torque (in Nm) than 2010 Daihatsu Sirion. (94 Nm @ 3600 RPM). This means 1959 Cadillac 62 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2010 Daihatsu Sirion. 1959 Cadillac 62 has automatic transmission and 2010 Daihatsu Sirion has manual transmission. 2010 Daihatsu Sirion 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 | 2010 Daihatsu Sirion | |
| Make | Cadillac | Daihatsu |
| Model | 62 | Sirion |
| Year Released | 1959 | 2010 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 6381 cc | 998 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 3 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 325 HP | 69 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4800 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Torque | 583 Nm | 94 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3000 RPM | 3600 RPM |
| Engine Bore Size | 101.6 mm | 71.1 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 98.4 mm | 84 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 10.5:1 | 10.5:1 |
| Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
