1963 Cadillac 62 vs. 1999 Lincoln LS
To start off, 1999 Lincoln LS is newer by 36 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1963 Cadillac 62. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1963 Cadillac 62 would be higher. At 6,390 cc (8 cylinders), 1963 Cadillac 62 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1999 Lincoln LS (249 HP @ 6100 RPM) has 52 more horse power than 1963 Cadillac 62. (197 HP @ 4800 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1999 Lincoln LS should accelerate faster than 1963 Cadillac 62. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1963 Cadillac 62 weights approximately 380 kg more than 1999 Lincoln LS.
Compare all specifications:
| 1963 Cadillac 62 | 1999 Lincoln LS | |
| Make | Cadillac | Lincoln |
| Model | 62 | LS |
| Year Released | 1963 | 1999 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 6390 cc | 3934 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Horse Power | 197 HP | 249 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4800 RPM | 6100 RPM |
| Engine Bore Size | 101.6 mm | 86 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 98.4 mm | 85 mm |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 2090 kg | 1710 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5680 mm | 4930 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 2040 mm | 1870 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1430 mm | 1430 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3300 mm | 2910 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 79 L | 68 L |
