1962 Cadillac 62 vs. 2000 Honda FCX
To start off, 2000 Honda FCX is newer by 38 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 @ 4800 RPM) has 75 more horse power than 2000 Honda FCX. (122 HP @ 6600 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1962 Cadillac 62 should accelerate faster than 2000 Honda FCX. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1962 Cadillac 62 weights approximately 1215 kg more than 2000 Honda FCX. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
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, 2000 Honda FCX, 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 309 more torque (in Nm) than 2000 Honda FCX. (273 Nm). This means 1962 Cadillac 62 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2000 Honda FCX.
Compare all specifications:
1962 Cadillac 62 | 2000 Honda FCX | |
Make | Cadillac | Honda |
Model | 62 | FCX |
Year Released | 1962 | 2000 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 6388 cc | 999 cc |
Engine Type | V | electric |
Horse Power | 197 HP | 122 HP |
Engine RPM | 4800 RPM | 6600 RPM |
Torque | 582 Nm | 273 Nm |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Vehicle Weight | 2055 kg | 840 kg |
Wheelbase Size | 3300 mm | 2580 mm |