1964 Cadillac 62 vs. 1989 Ford RS 200
To start off, 1989 Ford RS 200 is newer by 25 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1964 Cadillac 62. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1964 Cadillac 62 would be higher. At 7,028 cc (8 cylinders), 1964 Cadillac 62 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1989 Ford RS 200 (247 HP @ 6500 RPM) has 39 more horse power than 1964 Cadillac 62. (208 HP @ 4600 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1989 Ford RS 200 should accelerate faster than 1964 Cadillac 62. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1964 Cadillac 62 weights approximately 893 kg more than 1989 Ford RS 200.
Compare all specifications:
| 1964 Cadillac 62 | 1989 Ford RS 200 | |
| Make | Cadillac | Ford |
| Model | 62 | RS 200 |
| Year Released | 1964 | 1989 |
| Engine Position | Front | Middle |
| Engine Size | 7028 cc | 1804 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 208 HP | 247 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4600 RPM | 6500 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 2 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 2075 kg | 1182 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5680 mm | 4000 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 2040 mm | 1770 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1430 mm | 1330 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3300 mm | 2410 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 79 L | 116 L |
