1963 Cadillac 62 vs. 2001 Mercedes-Benz ML
To start off, 2001 Mercedes-Benz ML is newer by 38 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. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2001 Mercedes-Benz ML weights approximately 15 kg more than 1963 Cadillac 62.
Because 2001 Mercedes-Benz ML is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1963 Cadillac 62. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2001 Mercedes-Benz ML 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:
| 1963 Cadillac 62 | 2001 Mercedes-Benz ML | |
| Make | Cadillac | Mercedes-Benz |
| Model | 62 | ML |
| Year Released | 1963 | 2001 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 6390 cc | 2606 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 5 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 168 HP |
| Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
| Vehicle Weight | 2140 kg | 2155 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5670 mm | 4590 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1370 mm | 1830 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3300 mm | 2720 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 79 L | 83 L |
