1962 Cadillac Sixty vs. 2004 Ford Ranger
To start off, 2004 Ford Ranger is newer by 42 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 415 kg more than 2004 Ford Ranger.
Because 2004 Ford Ranger is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1962 Cadillac Sixty. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2004 Ford Ranger will offer significantly more control. 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.
Compare all specifications:
1962 Cadillac Sixty | 2004 Ford Ranger | |
Make | Cadillac | Ford |
Model | Sixty | Ranger |
Year Released | 1962 | 2004 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 6388 cc | 2300 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 0 HP | 0 HP |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
Vehicle Weight | 2135 kg | 1720 kg |
Vehicle Length | 5650 mm | 5090 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1420 mm | 1750 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3300 mm | 3010 mm |