1960 Cadillac 62 vs. 2009 Mercedes-Benz ML
To start off, 2009 Mercedes-Benz ML is newer by 49 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, 2009 Mercedes-Benz ML (210 HP @ 3800 RPM) has 13 more horse power than 1960 Cadillac 62. (197 HP @ 4800 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Mercedes-Benz ML should accelerate faster than 1960 Cadillac 62.
Because 2009 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, 2009 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 | 2009 Mercedes-Benz ML | |
Make | Cadillac | Mercedes-Benz |
Model | 62 | ML |
Year Released | 1960 | 2009 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 6390 cc | 2987 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 197 HP | 210 HP |
Engine RPM | 4800 RPM | 3800 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Diesel |
Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Length | 5730 mm | 4790 mm |
Vehicle Width | 2040 mm | 1940 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1510 mm | 1820 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3310 mm | 2920 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 79 L | 95 L |