1963 Cadillac 62 vs. 2005 Mercedes-Benz R
To start off, 2005 Mercedes-Benz R is newer by 42 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. 2005 Mercedes-Benz R weights approximately 95 kg more than 1963 Cadillac 62.
Because 2005 Mercedes-Benz R 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, 2005 Mercedes-Benz R 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 | 2005 Mercedes-Benz R | |
| Make | Cadillac | Mercedes-Benz |
| Model | 62 | R |
| Year Released | 1963 | 2005 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 6390 cc | 3498 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 268 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
| Vehicle Weight | 2140 kg | 2235 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5670 mm | 5160 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1370 mm | 1660 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3300 mm | 3220 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 79 L | 62 L |
