2003 BMW M3 vs. 1964 Cadillac Sixty
To start off, 2003 BMW M3 is newer by 39 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1964 Cadillac Sixty. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1964 Cadillac Sixty would be higher. At 7,027 cc (8 cylinders), 1964 Cadillac Sixty is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2003 BMW M3 (342 HP @ 7900 RPM) has 134 more horse power than 1964 Cadillac Sixty. (208 HP @ 4600 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2003 BMW M3 should accelerate faster than 1964 Cadillac Sixty. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1964 Cadillac Sixty weights approximately 735 kg more than 2003 BMW M3.
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:
2003 BMW M3 | 1964 Cadillac Sixty | |
Make | BMW | Cadillac |
Model | M3 | Sixty |
Year Released | 2003 | 1964 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3168 cc | 7027 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 342 HP | 208 HP |
Engine RPM | 7900 RPM | 4600 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Vehicle Weight | 1385 kg | 2120 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4500 mm | 5670 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1790 mm | 2030 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1370 mm | 1430 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2730 mm | 3300 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 63 L | 79 L |