1960 Cadillac 62 vs. 1997 Lincoln Continental
To start off, 1997 Lincoln Continental is newer by 37 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, 1997 Lincoln Continental (217 HP @ 5750 RPM) has 20 more horse power than 1960 Cadillac 62. (197 HP @ 4800 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1997 Lincoln Continental should accelerate faster than 1960 Cadillac 62. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1960 Cadillac 62 weights approximately 450 kg more than 1997 Lincoln Continental.
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, 1997 Lincoln Continental, 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 | 1997 Lincoln Continental | |
Make | Cadillac | Lincoln |
Model | 62 | Continental |
Year Released | 1960 | 1997 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 6390 cc | 4601 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 197 HP | 217 HP |
Engine RPM | 4800 RPM | 5750 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 2200 kg | 1750 kg |
Vehicle Length | 5730 mm | 5250 mm |
Vehicle Width | 2040 mm | 1880 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1510 mm | 1430 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3310 mm | 2780 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 79 L | 75 L |