1960 Cadillac 62 vs. 1995 Volvo 960
To start off, 1995 Volvo 960 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, 1960 Cadillac 62 (197 HP @ 4800 RPM) has 29 more horse power than 1995 Volvo 960. (168 HP @ 5700 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1960 Cadillac 62 should accelerate faster than 1995 Volvo 960. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1960 Cadillac 62 weights approximately 695 kg more than 1995 Volvo 960. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
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 Volvo 960 | |
| Make | Cadillac | Volvo |
| Model | 62 | 960 |
| Year Released | 1960 | 1995 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 6390 cc | 2473 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 197 HP | 168 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4800 RPM | 5700 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 2195 kg | 1500 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5730 mm | 4880 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 2040 mm | 1750 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1430 mm | 1420 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3310 mm | 2780 mm |
