1962 Cadillac Sixty vs. 1991 Volvo 240
To start off, 1991 Volvo 240 is newer by 29 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1962 Cadillac Sixty. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1962 Cadillac Sixty would be higher. At 6,388 cc (8 cylinders), 1962 Cadillac Sixty is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1962 Cadillac Sixty weights approximately 845 kg more than 1991 Volvo 240.
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 Sixty (582 Nm) has 425 more torque (in Nm) than 1991 Volvo 240. (157 Nm). This means 1962 Cadillac Sixty will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1991 Volvo 240.
Compare all specifications:
| 1962 Cadillac Sixty | 1991 Volvo 240 | |
| Make | Cadillac | Volvo |
| Model | Sixty | 240 |
| Year Released | 1962 | 1991 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 6388 cc | 1986 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 96 HP |
| Torque | 582 Nm | 157 Nm |
| Engine Bore Size | 101.6 mm | 82.7 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 98.4 mm | 93 mm |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Vehicle Weight | 2135 kg | 1290 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5650 mm | 4790 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1420 mm | 1440 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3300 mm | 2660 mm |
