1966 Cadillac Sixty vs. 2005 Lincoln LS
To start off, 2005 Lincoln LS is newer by 39 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1966 Cadillac Sixty. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1966 Cadillac Sixty would be higher. At 7,029 cc (8 cylinders), 1966 Cadillac Sixty is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2005 Lincoln LS (229 HP @ 6750 RPM) has 21 more horse power than 1966 Cadillac Sixty. (208 HP @ 4600 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2005 Lincoln LS should accelerate faster than 1966 Cadillac Sixty. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1966 Cadillac Sixty weights approximately 428 kg more than 2005 Lincoln LS.
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:
1966 Cadillac Sixty | 2005 Lincoln LS | |
Make | Cadillac | Lincoln |
Model | Sixty | LS |
Year Released | 1966 | 2005 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 7029 cc | 2967 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Horse Power | 208 HP | 229 HP |
Engine RPM | 4600 RPM | 6750 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Vehicle Weight | 2115 kg | 1687 kg |
Vehicle Length | 5790 mm | 4930 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1990 mm | 1870 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1370 mm | 1430 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3390 mm | 3030 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 82 L | 68 L |