1960 Cadillac 62 vs. 2013 Volvo C70
To start off, 2013 Volvo C70 is newer by 53 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, 2013 Volvo C70 (224 HP @ 5000 RPM) has 27 more horse power than 1960 Cadillac 62. (197 HP @ 4800 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2013 Volvo C70 should accelerate faster than 1960 Cadillac 62. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1960 Cadillac 62 weights approximately 449 kg more than 2013 Volvo C70.
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, 2013 Volvo C70, 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 | 2013 Volvo C70 | |
Make | Cadillac | Volvo |
Model | 62 | C70 |
Year Released | 1960 | 2013 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 6390 cc | 2500 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 5 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | boxer |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 5 valves |
Horse Power | 197 HP | 224 HP |
Engine RPM | 4800 RPM | 5000 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 2200 kg | 1751 kg |
Vehicle Length | 5730 mm | 4615 mm |
Vehicle Width | 2040 mm | 1836 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1510 mm | 1400 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3310 mm | 2640 mm |