1962 Cadillac 62 vs. 1996 Mitsubishi FTO
To start off, 1996 Mitsubishi FTO is newer by 34 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, 1962 Cadillac 62 (197 HP) has 2 more horse power than 1996 Mitsubishi FTO. (195 HP). In normal driving conditions, 1962 Cadillac 62 should accelerate faster than 1996 Mitsubishi FTO.
Because 1962 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 1962 Cadillac 62. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1996 Mitsubishi FTO, 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. Let's talk about torque, 1962 Cadillac 62 (582 Nm) has 380 more torque (in Nm) than 1996 Mitsubishi FTO. (202 Nm). This means 1962 Cadillac 62 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1996 Mitsubishi FTO.
Compare all specifications:
| 1962 Cadillac 62 | 1996 Mitsubishi FTO | |
| Make | Cadillac | Mitsubishi |
| Model | 62 | FTO |
| Year Released | 1962 | 1996 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 6388 cc | 1998 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Horse Power | 197 HP | 195 HP |
| Torque | 582 Nm | 202 Nm |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 5650 mm | 4320 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1370 mm | 1300 mm |
