1998 Audi AL2 vs. 1960 Cadillac 62
To start off, 1998 Audi AL2 is newer by 38 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) has 123 more horse power than 1998 Audi AL2. (74 HP) In normal driving conditions, 1960 Cadillac 62 should accelerate faster than 1998 Audi AL2. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1960 Cadillac 62 weights approximately 1384 kg more than 1998 Audi AL2. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 1960 Cadillac 62 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 1960 Cadillac 62. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1998 Audi AL2, 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:
| 1998 Audi AL2 | 1960 Cadillac 62 | |
| Make | Audi | Cadillac |
| Model | AL2 | 62 |
| Year Released | 1998 | 1960 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1199 cc | 6390 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 3 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 74 HP | 197 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Vehicle Weight | 816 kg | 2200 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 3770 mm | 5730 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1630 mm | 2040 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1560 mm | 1510 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2410 mm | 3310 mm |
