1963 Cadillac 62 vs. 2010 Ford F-250
To start off, 2010 Ford F-250 is newer by 47 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 6,388 cc (8 cylinders), 1963 Cadillac 62 is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2010 Ford F-250 weights approximately 943 kg more than 1963 Cadillac 62.
Because 2010 Ford F-250 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, 2010 Ford F-250 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 | 2010 Ford F-250 | |
| Make | Cadillac | Ford |
| Model | 62 | F-250 |
| Year Released | 1963 | 2010 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 6388 cc | 5400 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 3 valves |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 300 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
| Vehicle Weight | 2055 kg | 2998 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5670 mm | 6253 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1370 mm | 2029 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3300 mm | 3967 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 79 L | 115 L |
