1960 Cadillac 62 vs. 1998 Mazda RX-7
To start off, 1998 Mazda RX-7 is newer by 38 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, 1998 Mazda RX-7 (265 HP @ 6500 RPM) has 68 more horse power than 1960 Cadillac 62. (197 HP @ 4800 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1998 Mazda RX-7 should accelerate faster than 1960 Cadillac 62. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1960 Cadillac 62 weights approximately 960 kg more than 1998 Mazda RX-7.
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 | 1998 Mazda RX-7 | |
| Make | Cadillac | Mazda |
| Model | 62 | RX-7 |
| Year Released | 1960 | 1998 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 6390 cc | 2616 cc |
| Engine Type | V | dual-disk rotary |
| Horse Power | 197 HP | 265 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4800 RPM | 6500 RPM |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 2 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 2200 kg | 1240 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5730 mm | 4290 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 2040 mm | 1770 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1510 mm | 1240 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3310 mm | 2430 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 79 L | 76 L |
