1960 Cadillac 62 vs. 2003 Toyota Land Cruiser
To start off, 2003 Toyota Land Cruiser is newer by 43 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, 2003 Toyota Land Cruiser (246 HP @ 5200 RPM) has 49 more horse power than 1960 Cadillac 62. (197 HP @ 4800 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2003 Toyota Land Cruiser should accelerate faster than 1960 Cadillac 62. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1960 Cadillac 62 weights approximately 300 kg more than 2003 Toyota Land Cruiser.
Because 2003 Toyota Land Cruiser is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1960 Cadillac 62. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2003 Toyota Land Cruiser will offer significantly more control. 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 | 2003 Toyota Land Cruiser | |
Make | Cadillac | Toyota |
Model | 62 | Land Cruiser |
Year Released | 1960 | 2003 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 6390 cc | 3993 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 197 HP | 246 HP |
Engine RPM | 4800 RPM | 5200 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 2200 kg | 1900 kg |
Vehicle Length | 5730 mm | 4820 mm |
Vehicle Width | 2040 mm | 1890 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1510 mm | 1880 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3310 mm | 2800 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 79 L | 87 L |