1964 Cadillac 62 vs. 2003 Ford F-250
To start off, 2003 Ford F-250 is newer by 39 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 7,029 cc (8 cylinders), 1964 Cadillac 62 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2003 Ford F-250 (256 HP @ 4500 RPM) has 48 more horse power than 1964 Cadillac 62. (208 HP @ 4600 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2003 Ford F-250 should accelerate faster than 1964 Cadillac 62. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2003 Ford F-250 weights approximately 320 kg more than 1964 Cadillac 62. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Compare all specifications:
| 1964 Cadillac 62 | 2003 Ford F-250 | |
| Make | Cadillac | Ford |
| Model | 62 | F-250 |
| Year Released | 1964 | 2003 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 7029 cc | 5407 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Horse Power | 208 HP | 256 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4600 RPM | 4500 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 2030 kg | 2350 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5690 mm | 5760 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 2030 mm | 2040 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1370 mm | 1940 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3300 mm | 3490 mm |
