1963 Cadillac 62 vs. 2009 Cadillac BLS
To start off, 2009 Cadillac BLS is newer by 46 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, 2009 Cadillac BLS (252 HP @ 5500 RPM) has 55 more horse power than 1963 Cadillac 62. (197 HP @ 4800 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Cadillac BLS should accelerate faster than 1963 Cadillac 62. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1963 Cadillac 62 weights approximately 455 kg more than 2009 Cadillac BLS.
Compare all specifications:
| 1963 Cadillac 62 | 2009 Cadillac BLS | |
| Make | Cadillac | Cadillac |
| Model | 62 | BLS |
| Year Released | 1963 | 2009 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 6390 cc | 2792 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Horse Power | 197 HP | 252 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4800 RPM | 5500 RPM |
| Engine Bore Size | 101.6 mm | 89.1 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 98.4 mm | 74.8 mm |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline - Premium |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 2090 kg | 1635 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5680 mm | 4690 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 2040 mm | 1760 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1430 mm | 1480 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3300 mm | 2680 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 79 L | 58 L |
