1965 Cadillac Calais vs. 1963 Triumph 2000
To start off, 1965 Cadillac Calais is newer by 2 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1963 Triumph 2000. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1963 Triumph 2000 would be higher. At 7,029 cc (8 cylinders), 1965 Cadillac Calais is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1965 Cadillac Calais (208 HP @ 4600 RPM) has 119 more horse power than 1963 Triumph 2000. (89 HP @ 5000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1965 Cadillac Calais should accelerate faster than 1963 Triumph 2000. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1965 Cadillac Calais weights approximately 840 kg more than 1963 Triumph 2000. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Compare all specifications:
| 1965 Cadillac Calais | 1963 Triumph 2000 | |
| Make | Cadillac | Triumph |
| Model | Calais | 2000 |
| Year Released | 1965 | 1963 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 7029 cc | 1998 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 208 HP | 89 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4600 RPM | 5000 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 2010 kg | 1170 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5700 mm | 4420 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 2030 mm | 1660 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1370 mm | 1430 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3300 mm | 2700 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 95 L | 64 L |
