2003 BMW 520 vs. 1962 Cadillac Sixty
To start off, 2003 BMW 520 is newer by 41 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1962 Cadillac Sixty. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1962 Cadillac Sixty would be higher. At 6,388 cc (8 cylinders), 1962 Cadillac Sixty is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1962 Cadillac Sixty weights approximately 435 kg more than 2003 BMW 520.
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 Sixty (582 Nm) has 372 more torque (in Nm) than 2003 BMW 520. (210 Nm). This means 1962 Cadillac Sixty will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2003 BMW 520.
Compare all specifications:
| 2003 BMW 520 | 1962 Cadillac Sixty | |
| Make | BMW | Cadillac |
| Model | 520 | Sixty |
| Year Released | 2003 | 1962 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2171 cc | 6388 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 167 HP | 0 HP |
| Torque | 210 Nm | 582 Nm |
| Engine Bore Size | 80 mm | 101.6 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 72 mm | 98.4 mm |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1700 kg | 2135 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4810 mm | 5650 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1420 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2730 mm | 3300 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 70 L | 75 L |
