1963 Cadillac 62 vs. 2004 Ford Maverick
To start off, 2004 Ford Maverick is newer by 41 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, 1963 Cadillac 62 (197 HP @ 4800 RPM) has 75 more horse power than 2004 Ford Maverick. (122 HP @ 5300 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1963 Cadillac 62 should accelerate faster than 2004 Ford Maverick. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1963 Cadillac 62 weights approximately 575 kg more than 2004 Ford Maverick. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Compare all specifications:
| 1963 Cadillac 62 | 2004 Ford Maverick | |
| Make | Cadillac | Ford |
| Model | 62 | Maverick |
| Year Released | 1963 | 2004 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 6390 cc | 1983 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 197 HP | 122 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4800 RPM | 5300 RPM |
| Engine Bore Size | 101.6 mm | 84.9 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 98.4 mm | 88 mm |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 2090 kg | 1515 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5680 mm | 4420 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 2040 mm | 1830 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1430 mm | 1780 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3300 mm | 2730 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 79 L | 59 L |
