1961 Cadillac 62 vs. 2006 Ford Mustang
To start off, 2006 Ford Mustang is newer by 45 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1961 Cadillac 62. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1961 Cadillac 62 would be higher. At 6,389 cc (8 cylinders), 1961 Cadillac 62 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Ford Mustang (300 HP @ 5750 RPM) has 103 more horse power than 1961 Cadillac 62. (197 HP @ 4800 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2006 Ford Mustang should accelerate faster than 1961 Cadillac 62. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2006 Ford Mustang weights approximately 716 kg more than 1961 Cadillac 62. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
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:
| 1961 Cadillac 62 | 2006 Ford Mustang | |
| Make | Cadillac | Ford |
| Model | 62 | Mustang |
| Year Released | 1961 | 2006 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 6389 cc | 4605 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 197 HP | 300 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4800 RPM | 5750 RPM |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 2140 kg | 2856 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5650 mm | 4770 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 2040 mm | 1890 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1510 mm | 1390 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3300 mm | 2730 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 79 L | 61 L |
