1959 Cadillac 62 vs. 2010 Holden UTE
To start off, 2010 Holden UTE 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, 2010 Holden UTE (357 HP) has 32 more horse power than 1959 Cadillac 62. (325 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Holden UTE 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) has 53 more torque (in Nm) than 2010 Holden UTE. (530 Nm). This means 1959 Cadillac 62 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2010 Holden UTE. 1959 Cadillac 62 has automatic transmission and 2010 Holden UTE has manual transmission. 2010 Holden UTE 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 Holden UTE | |
| Make | Cadillac | Holden |
| Model | 62 | UTE |
| Year Released | 1959 | 2010 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 6381 cc | 6000 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Horse Power | 325 HP | 357 HP |
| Torque | 583 Nm | 530 Nm |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 2 seats |
