1960 Cadillac 62 vs. 1996 Ford Taurus
To start off, 1996 Ford Taurus is newer by 36 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, 1996 Ford Taurus (238 HP @ 6500 RPM) has 41 more horse power than 1960 Cadillac 62. (197 HP @ 4800 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1996 Ford Taurus should accelerate faster than 1960 Cadillac 62. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1960 Cadillac 62 weights approximately 682 kg more than 1996 Ford Taurus.
Because 1960 Cadillac 62 is rear wheel drive (RWD), it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, it will be much easier to do with 1960 Cadillac 62. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1996 Ford Taurus, being front wheel drive (FWD), will offer much better control with better grip. 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 | 1996 Ford Taurus | |
Make | Cadillac | Ford |
Model | 62 | Taurus |
Year Released | 1960 | 1996 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 6390 cc | 3400 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Horse Power | 197 HP | 238 HP |
Engine RPM | 4800 RPM | 6500 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 2200 kg | 1518 kg |
Vehicle Length | 5730 mm | 5030 mm |
Vehicle Width | 2040 mm | 1860 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1510 mm | 1430 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3310 mm | 2760 mm |