1962 Cadillac 62 vs. 2001 BMW Z3
To start off, 2001 BMW Z3 is newer by 39 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, 2001 BMW Z3 (229 HP @ 5900 RPM) has 32 more horse power than 1962 Cadillac 62. (197 HP @ 4800 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2001 BMW Z3 should accelerate faster than 1962 Cadillac 62. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1962 Cadillac 62 weights approximately 610 kg more than 2001 BMW Z3.
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 282 more torque (in Nm) than 2001 BMW Z3. (300 Nm). This means 1962 Cadillac 62 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2001 BMW Z3.
Compare all specifications:
1962 Cadillac 62 | 2001 BMW Z3 | |
Make | Cadillac | BMW |
Model | 62 | Z3 |
Year Released | 1962 | 2001 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 6388 cc | 2979 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 197 HP | 229 HP |
Engine RPM | 4800 RPM | 5900 RPM |
Torque | 582 Nm | 300 Nm |
Engine Bore Size | 101.6 mm | 84 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 98.4 mm | 89.6 mm |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 2055 kg | 1445 kg |
Vehicle Length | 5650 mm | 4030 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1370 mm | 1310 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3300 mm | 2450 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 75 L | 51 L |