1962 Cadillac 62 vs. 1966 Ford GT 40
To start off, 1966 Ford GT 40 is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1962 Cadillac 62. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1962 Cadillac 62 would be higher. At 6,388 cc (8 cylinders), 1962 Cadillac 62 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1966 Ford GT 40 (350 HP @ 7200 RPM) has 153 more horse power than 1962 Cadillac 62. (197 HP @ 4800 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1966 Ford GT 40 should accelerate faster than 1962 Cadillac 62. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1962 Cadillac 62 weights approximately 919 kg more than 1966 Ford GT 40.
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. Let's talk about torque, 1962 Cadillac 62 (582 Nm) has 497 more torque (in Nm) than 1966 Ford GT 40. (85 Nm). This means 1962 Cadillac 62 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1966 Ford GT 40.
Compare all specifications:
| 1962 Cadillac 62 | 1966 Ford GT 40 | |
| Make | Cadillac | Ford |
| Model | 62 | GT 40 |
| Year Released | 1962 | 1966 |
| Engine Position | Front | Middle |
| Engine Size | 6388 cc | 4195 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Horse Power | 197 HP | 350 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4800 RPM | 7200 RPM |
| Torque | 582 Nm | 85 Nm |
| Engine Bore Size | 101.6 mm | 95.6 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 98.4 mm | 72.9 mm |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 2055 kg | 1136 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5650 mm | 4150 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1370 mm | 1040 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3300 mm | 2420 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 75 L | 125 L |
