1964 Cadillac Eldorado vs. 2013 Kia Optima
To start off, 2013 Kia Optima is newer by 49 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1964 Cadillac Eldorado. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1964 Cadillac Eldorado would be higher. At 7,029 cc (8 cylinders), 1964 Cadillac Eldorado is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2013 Kia Optima (270 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 62 more horse power than 1964 Cadillac Eldorado. (208 HP @ 4600 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2013 Kia Optima should accelerate faster than 1964 Cadillac Eldorado. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1964 Cadillac Eldorado weights approximately 552 kg more than 2013 Kia Optima.
Because 1964 Cadillac Eldorado 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 1964 Cadillac Eldorado. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2013 Kia Optima, 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:
| 1964 Cadillac Eldorado | 2013 Kia Optima | |
| Make | Cadillac | Kia |
| Model | Eldorado | Optima |
| Year Released | 1964 | 2013 |
| Body Type | Convertible | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 7029 cc | 2000 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 208 HP | 270 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4600 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 2090 kg | 1538 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5690 mm | 4845 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 2030 mm | 1830 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1430 mm | 1455 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3300 mm | 2795 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 75 L | 70 L |
