1960 Cadillac 62 vs. 2004 Mercedes-Benz ML
To start off, 2004 Mercedes-Benz ML is newer by 44 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 10 more horse power than 2004 Mercedes-Benz ML. (187 HP @ 4200 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1960 Cadillac 62 should accelerate faster than 2004 Mercedes-Benz ML. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1960 Cadillac 62 weights approximately 85 kg more than 2004 Mercedes-Benz ML. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 2004 Mercedes-Benz ML 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, 2004 Mercedes-Benz ML 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 | 2004 Mercedes-Benz ML | |
Make | Cadillac | Mercedes-Benz |
Model | 62 | ML |
Year Released | 1960 | 2004 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 6390 cc | 2986 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Horse Power | 197 HP | 187 HP |
Engine RPM | 4800 RPM | 4200 RPM |
Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Vehicle Weight | 2195 kg | 2110 kg |
Vehicle Length | 5730 mm | 4790 mm |
Vehicle Width | 2040 mm | 1920 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1430 mm | 1820 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3310 mm | 2970 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 75 L | 95 L |