2004 Audi TT vs. 1958 Cadillac 62
To start off, 2004 Audi TT is newer by 46 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1958 Cadillac 62. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1958 Cadillac 62 would be higher. At 5,980 cc (8 cylinders), 1958 Cadillac 62 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1958 Cadillac 62 (190 HP @ 4800 RPM) has 42 more horse power than 2004 Audi TT. (148 HP @ 6300 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1958 Cadillac 62 should accelerate faster than 2004 Audi TT. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1958 Cadillac 62 weights approximately 745 kg more than 2004 Audi TT. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 1958 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 1958 Cadillac 62. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2004 Audi TT, 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:
2004 Audi TT | 1958 Cadillac 62 | |
Make | Audi | Cadillac |
Model | TT | 62 |
Year Released | 2004 | 1958 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1780 cc | 5980 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 5 valves | 2 valves |
Horse Power | 148 HP | 190 HP |
Engine RPM | 6300 RPM | 4800 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Front | Rear |
Vehicle Weight | 1340 kg | 2085 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4010 mm | 5520 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1760 mm | 2040 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1350 mm | 1590 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2430 mm | 3300 mm |