1964 Cadillac Sixty vs. 1969 Ford Mustang
To start off, 1969 Ford Mustang is newer by 5 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1964 Cadillac Sixty. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1964 Cadillac Sixty would be higher. At 7,027 cc (8 cylinders), 1964 Cadillac Sixty is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1969 Ford Mustang (217 HP @ 4800 RPM) has 9 more horse power than 1964 Cadillac Sixty. (208 HP @ 4600 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1969 Ford Mustang should accelerate faster than 1964 Cadillac Sixty. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1964 Cadillac Sixty weights approximately 955 kg more than 1969 Ford Mustang.
Both vehicles are rear wheel drive (RWD) - it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, both vehicles do the job better than front wheel drive vehicles. 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 Sixty | 1969 Ford Mustang | |
| Make | Cadillac | Ford |
| Model | Sixty | Mustang |
| Year Released | 1964 | 1969 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 7027 cc | 4731 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 208 HP | 217 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4600 RPM | 4800 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 2120 kg | 1165 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5670 mm | 4620 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 2030 mm | 1740 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1430 mm | 1310 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3300 mm | 2750 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 79 L | 41 L |
