1963 Cadillac 62 vs. 2013 Toyota Tundra
To start off, 2013 Toyota Tundra is newer by 50 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. 2013 Toyota Tundra weights approximately 421 kg more than 1963 Cadillac 62.
Because 2013 Toyota Tundra 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, 2013 Toyota Tundra 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 | 2013 Toyota Tundra | |
| Make | Cadillac | Toyota |
| Model | 62 | Tundra |
| Year Released | 1963 | 2013 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 6390 cc | 5700 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 376 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Flex Fuel |
| Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
| Vehicle Weight | 2140 kg | 2561 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5670 mm | 5810 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1370 mm | 1940 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3300 mm | 3700 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 79 L | 100 L |
