1998 BMW 316 vs. 1963 Cadillac 62
To start off, 1998 BMW 316 is newer by 35 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1963 Cadillac 62. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1963 Cadillac 62 would be higher. At 6,388 cc (8 cylinders), 1963 Cadillac 62 is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1963 Cadillac 62 weights approximately 805 kg more than 1998 BMW 316.
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:
| 1998 BMW 316 | 1963 Cadillac 62 | |
| Make | BMW | Cadillac |
| Model | 316 | 62 |
| Year Released | 1998 | 1963 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1895 cc | 6388 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 106 HP | 0 HP |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Vehicle Weight | 1250 kg | 2055 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4220 mm | 5670 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1400 mm | 1370 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2710 mm | 3300 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 55 L | 79 L |
