1964 Cadillac Sixty vs. 2004 Ford Ecosport
To start off, 2004 Ford Ecosport is newer by 40 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) has 114 more horse power than 2004 Ford Ecosport. (94 HP). In normal driving conditions, 1964 Cadillac Sixty should accelerate faster than 2004 Ford Ecosport.
Because 1964 Cadillac Sixty 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 Sixty. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2004 Ford Ecosport, 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 Sixty | 2004 Ford Ecosport | |
Make | Cadillac | Ford |
Model | Sixty | Ecosport |
Year Released | 1964 | 2004 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 7027 cc | 1000 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 208 HP | 94 HP |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Vehicle Length | 5670 mm | 4228 mm |
Vehicle Width | 2030 mm | 1980 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1430 mm | 1679 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3300 mm | 2490 mm |