2001 Acura CL vs. 1952 Cadillac 62
To start off, 2001 Acura CL is newer by 49 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1952 Cadillac 62. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1952 Cadillac 62 would be higher. At 5,425 cc (8 cylinders), 1952 Cadillac 62 is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1952 Cadillac 62 weights approximately 295 kg more than 2001 Acura CL.
Because 1952 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 1952 Cadillac 62. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2001 Acura CL, 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:
| 2001 Acura CL | 1952 Cadillac 62 | |
| Make | Acura | Cadillac |
| Model | CL | 62 |
| Year Released | 2001 | 1952 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3210 cc | 5425 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 225 HP | 0 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 1580 kg | 1875 kg |
| Vehicle Width | 1800 mm | 2040 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2750 mm | 3210 mm |
