1963 Cadillac 62 vs. 2009 Ford Escape
To start off, 2009 Ford Escape 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. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1963 Cadillac 62 weights approximately 1083 kg more than 2009 Ford Escape.
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, 2009 Ford Escape, 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 | 2009 Ford Escape | |
Make | Cadillac | Ford |
Model | 62 | Escape |
Year Released | 1963 | 2009 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 0 HP | 171 HP |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Vehicle Weight | 2055 kg | 972 kg |
Vehicle Length | 5670 mm | 4440 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1370 mm | 1730 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3300 mm | 2630 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 79 L | 62 L |