1960 Cadillac 62 vs. 1995 Jaguar XJS
To start off, 1995 Jaguar XJS is newer by 35 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1960 Cadillac 62. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1960 Cadillac 62 would be higher. At 6,390 cc (8 cylinders), 1960 Cadillac 62 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1995 Jaguar XJS (222 HP) has 25 more horse power than 1960 Cadillac 62. (197 HP) In normal driving conditions, 1995 Jaguar XJS should accelerate faster than 1960 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.
Compare all specifications:
| 1960 Cadillac 62 | 1995 Jaguar XJS | |
| Make | Cadillac | Jaguar |
| Model | 62 | XJS |
| Year Released | 1960 | 1995 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 6390 cc | 3980 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 197 HP | 222 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 5730 mm | 4770 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 2040 mm | 1800 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1510 mm | 1260 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3310 mm | 2600 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 79 L | 82 L |
