1960 Cadillac 62 vs. 2010 Ford E-350
To start off, 2010 Ford E-350 is newer by 50 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 20 more horse power than 2010 Ford E-350. (177 HP @ 6000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1960 Cadillac 62 should accelerate faster than 2010 Ford E-350.
Because 1960 Cadillac 62 is rear wheel drive (RWD), it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, it will be much easier to do with 1960 Cadillac 62. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2010 Ford E-350, being front wheel drive (FWD), will offer much better control with better grip. 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 | 2010 Ford E-350 | |
| Make | Cadillac | Ford |
| Model | 62 | E-350 |
| Year Released | 1960 | 2010 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 6390 cc | 5400 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 197 HP | 177 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4800 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Vehicle Length | 5730 mm | 4437 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 2040 mm | 1806 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1430 mm | 1720 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3310 mm | 2619 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 75 L | 57 L |
