1962 Austin A 40 vs. 2003 Cadillac Escalade
To start off, 2003 Cadillac Escalade is newer by 41 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1962 Austin A 40. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1962 Austin A 40 would be higher. At 5,967 cc (8 cylinders), 2003 Cadillac Escalade is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2003 Cadillac Escalade weights approximately 1730 kg more than 1962 Austin A 40.
Because 2003 Cadillac Escalade is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1962 Austin A 40. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2003 Cadillac Escalade 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:
1962 Austin A 40 | 2003 Cadillac Escalade | |
Make | Austin | Cadillac |
Model | A 40 | Escalade |
Year Released | 1962 | 2003 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 948 cc | 5967 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Horse Power | 36 HP | 0 HP |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 760 kg | 2490 kg |
Vehicle Length | 3670 mm | 5060 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1520 mm | 2010 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1890 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2220 mm | 2960 mm |