1960 Cadillac 62 vs. 2005 Ford Thunderbird
To start off, 2005 Ford Thunderbird is newer by 45 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, 2005 Ford Thunderbird (280 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 83 more horse power than 1960 Cadillac 62. (197 HP @ 4800 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2005 Ford Thunderbird should accelerate faster than 1960 Cadillac 62. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1960 Cadillac 62 weights approximately 483 kg more than 2005 Ford Thunderbird.
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 | 2005 Ford Thunderbird | |
| Make | Cadillac | Ford |
| Model | 62 | Thunderbird |
| Year Released | 1960 | 2005 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 6390 cc | 3932 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 197 HP | 280 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4800 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 2 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 2195 kg | 1712 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5730 mm | 4740 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 2040 mm | 1840 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1430 mm | 1330 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3310 mm | 2760 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 75 L | 68 L |
