1962 Cadillac 62 vs. 2006 Lincoln LS
To start off, 2006 Lincoln LS is newer by 44 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, 2006 Lincoln LS (280 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 83 more horse power than 1962 Cadillac 62. (197 HP @ 4800 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2006 Lincoln LS should accelerate faster than 1962 Cadillac 62. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1962 Cadillac 62 weights approximately 344 kg more than 2006 Lincoln LS.
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 194 more torque (in Nm) than 2006 Lincoln LS. (388 Nm). This means 1962 Cadillac 62 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2006 Lincoln LS.
Compare all specifications:
1962 Cadillac 62 | 2006 Lincoln LS | |
Make | Cadillac | Lincoln |
Model | 62 | LS |
Year Released | 1962 | 2006 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 6388 cc | 3933 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 197 HP | 280 HP |
Engine RPM | 4800 RPM | 6000 RPM |
Torque | 582 Nm | 388 Nm |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 2055 kg | 1711 kg |
Vehicle Length | 5650 mm | 4940 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1370 mm | 1430 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3300 mm | 2910 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 75 L | 68 L |