2005 Cadillac Escalade vs. 1963 Triumph 2000
To start off, 2005 Cadillac Escalade is newer by 42 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1963 Triumph 2000. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1963 Triumph 2000 would be higher. At 5,998 cc (8 cylinders), 2005 Cadillac Escalade is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2005 Cadillac Escalade (346 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 216 more horse power than 1963 Triumph 2000. (130 HP @ 5500 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2005 Cadillac Escalade should accelerate faster than 1963 Triumph 2000. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2005 Cadillac Escalade weights approximately 1332 kg more than 1963 Triumph 2000. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Let's talk about torque, 2005 Cadillac Escalade (515 Nm) has 317 more torque (in Nm) than 1963 Triumph 2000. (198 Nm). This means 2005 Cadillac Escalade will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1963 Triumph 2000.
Compare all specifications:
| 2005 Cadillac Escalade | 1963 Triumph 2000 | |
| Make | Cadillac | Triumph |
| Model | Escalade | 2000 |
| Year Released | 2005 | 1963 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 5998 cc | 2498 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 346 HP | 130 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 5500 RPM |
| Torque | 515 Nm | 198 Nm |
| Engine Bore Size | 102 mm | 74.8 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 92 mm | 95 mm |
| Number of Seats | 7 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 2527 kg | 1195 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5060 mm | 4420 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 2010 mm | 1660 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1950 mm | 1430 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2950 mm | 2700 mm |
