1963 Cadillac 62 vs. 2002 MCC Crossblade
To start off, 2002 MCC Crossblade is newer by 39 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 6,388 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 1315 kg more than 2002 MCC Crossblade.
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.
Compare all specifications:
| 1963 Cadillac 62 | 2002 MCC Crossblade | |
| Make | Cadillac | MCC |
| Model | 62 | Crossblade |
| Year Released | 1963 | 2002 |
| Engine Size | 6388 cc | 599 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 3 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 70 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Vehicle Weight | 2055 kg | 740 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5670 mm | 2630 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1370 mm | 1520 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3300 mm | 1810 mm |
