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. 1963 Cadillac 62 weights approximately 90 kg more than 2001 Mercedes-Benz ML.
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 | 3700 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 232 HP |
| Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
| Vehicle Weight | 2140 kg | 2050 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5670 mm | 4640 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1370 mm | 1830 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3300 mm | 2780 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 79 L | 72 L |
