1963 Cadillac DeVille vs. 2004 Ford Ecosport
To start off, 2004 Ford Ecosport is newer by 41 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1963 Cadillac DeVille. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1963 Cadillac DeVille would be higher. At 6,390 cc (8 cylinders), 1963 Cadillac DeVille is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1963 Cadillac DeVille (198 HP) has 89 more horse power than 2004 Ford Ecosport. (109 HP). In normal driving conditions, 1963 Cadillac DeVille should accelerate faster than 2004 Ford Ecosport.
Because 1963 Cadillac DeVille 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 DeVille. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2004 Ford Ecosport, 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 DeVille | 2004 Ford Ecosport | |
Make | Cadillac | Ford |
Model | DeVille | Ecosport |
Year Released | 1963 | 2004 |
Body Type | Sedan | SUV |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 6390 cc | 1600 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 198 HP | 109 HP |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Length | 5680 mm | 4228 mm |
Vehicle Width | 2030 mm | 1980 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1370 mm | 1679 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3300 mm | 2490 mm |