1983 Alpine A 310 vs. 1960 Cadillac 62
To start off, 1983 Alpine A 310 is newer by 23 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1960 Cadillac 62. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1960 Cadillac 62 would be higher. At 6,390 cc (8 cylinders), 1960 Cadillac 62 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1960 Cadillac 62 (197 HP @ 4800 RPM) has 49 more horse power than 1983 Alpine A 310. (148 HP @ 6000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1960 Cadillac 62 should accelerate faster than 1983 Alpine A 310. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1960 Cadillac 62 weights approximately 1215 kg more than 1983 Alpine A 310. 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:
| 1983 Alpine A 310 | 1960 Cadillac 62 | |
| Make | Alpine | Cadillac |
| Model | A 310 | 62 |
| Year Released | 1983 | 1960 |
| Engine Position | Rear | Front |
| Engine Size | 2663 cc | 6390 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 148 HP | 197 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 4800 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 980 kg | 2195 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4190 mm | 5730 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1650 mm | 2040 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1160 mm | 1430 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2280 mm | 3310 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 38 L | 75 L |
