2003 Alpina B 10 vs. 1962 Cadillac 62
To start off, 2003 Alpina B 10 is newer by 41 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1962 Cadillac 62. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1962 Cadillac 62 would be higher. At 6,388 cc (8 cylinders), 1962 Cadillac 62 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2003 Alpina B 10 (342 HP @ 5700 RPM) has 145 more horse power than 1962 Cadillac 62. (197 HP @ 4800 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2003 Alpina B 10 should accelerate faster than 1962 Cadillac 62. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1962 Cadillac 62 weights approximately 315 kg more than 2003 Alpina B 10.
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. Let's talk about torque, 1962 Cadillac 62 (582 Nm) has 92 more torque (in Nm) than 2003 Alpina B 10. (490 Nm). This means 1962 Cadillac 62 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2003 Alpina B 10.
Compare all specifications:
| 2003 Alpina B 10 | 1962 Cadillac 62 | |
| Make | Alpina | Cadillac |
| Model | B 10 | 62 |
| Year Released | 2003 | 1962 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4618 cc | 6388 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Horse Power | 342 HP | 197 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5700 RPM | 4800 RPM |
| Torque | 490 Nm | 582 Nm |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1740 kg | 2055 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4810 mm | 5650 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1370 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2840 mm | 3300 mm |
