1964 Cadillac Sixty vs. 2001 MCC Smart
To start off, 2001 MCC Smart is newer by 37 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, 1964 Cadillac Sixty (208 HP @ 4600 RPM) has 149 more horse power than 2001 MCC Smart. (59 HP @ 5250 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1964 Cadillac Sixty should accelerate faster than 2001 MCC Smart. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1964 Cadillac Sixty weights approximately 1400 kg more than 2001 MCC Smart. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
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 | 2001 MCC Smart | |
| Make | Cadillac | MCC |
| Model | Sixty | Smart |
| Year Released | 1964 | 2001 |
| Engine Position | Front | Rear |
| Engine Size | 7027 cc | 599 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 3 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 208 HP | 59 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4600 RPM | 5250 RPM |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 2 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 2120 kg | 720 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5670 mm | 2600 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 2030 mm | 1560 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1430 mm | 1460 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3300 mm | 1820 mm |
