1963 Cadillac 62 vs. 2010 Mazda 6
To start off, 2010 Mazda 6 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 6,390 cc (8 cylinders), 1963 Cadillac 62 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1963 Cadillac 62 (197 HP @ 4800 RPM) has 27 more horse power than 2010 Mazda 6. (170 HP @ 6000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1963 Cadillac 62 should accelerate faster than 2010 Mazda 6. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1963 Cadillac 62 weights approximately 612 kg more than 2010 Mazda 6. 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 | 2010 Mazda 6 | |
| Make | Cadillac | Mazda |
| Model | 62 | 6 |
| Year Released | 1963 | 2010 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 6390 cc | 2500 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 197 HP | 170 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4800 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 2090 kg | 1478 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5680 mm | 4920 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 2040 mm | 1839 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1430 mm | 1471 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3300 mm | 2789 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 79 L | 70 L |
