2004 Cadillac Escalade vs. 1962 Ford Thunderbird
To start off, 2004 Cadillac Escalade is newer by 42 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1962 Ford Thunderbird. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1962 Ford Thunderbird would be higher. At 6,964 cc (8 cylinders), 1962 Ford Thunderbird is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, both vehicles can yield 345 horse power. So under normal driving conditions, the acceleration of both vehicles should be relatively similar. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2004 Cadillac Escalade weights approximately 652 kg more than 1962 Ford Thunderbird.
Because 2004 Cadillac Escalade is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1962 Ford Thunderbird. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2004 Cadillac Escalade will offer significantly more control. 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 Cadillac Escalade | 1962 Ford Thunderbird | |
| Make | Cadillac | Ford |
| Model | Escalade | Thunderbird |
| Year Released | 2004 | 1962 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 5998 cc | 6964 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 345 HP | 345 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 5600 RPM |
| Drive Type | 4WD | Rear |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 2527 kg | 1875 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5060 mm | 5210 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 2010 mm | 1930 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1950 mm | 1340 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2950 mm | 2880 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 98 L | 40 L |
