1963 Cadillac 62 vs. 2002 Skoda Octavia
To start off, 2002 Skoda Octavia 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 6,390 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 920 kg more than 2002 Skoda Octavia.
Because 1963 Cadillac 62 is rear wheel drive (RWD), it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, it will be much easier to do with 1963 Cadillac 62. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2002 Skoda Octavia, being front wheel drive (FWD), will offer much better control with better grip. 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 Skoda Octavia | |
| Make | Cadillac | Skoda |
| Model | 62 | Octavia |
| Year Released | 1963 | 2002 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 6390 cc | 1595 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 101 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Vehicle Weight | 2140 kg | 1220 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5670 mm | 4510 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1370 mm | 1420 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3300 mm | 2520 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 79 L | 55 L |
