you are using the jdbc interface from java.sql classes, so the type of driver will not have any logic impact in your code, it will only have runtime / deployment impact.
You are also using the ojdb14.jar from Oracle, probably with a "thin" jdbc configuration, which means you are using a type-4 driver configuration. With such a configuration, you will only need to deploy the JDBC jar file with your database accessing program.
The other options include a JDBC bridge, which really means an ODBC connection wrapped in JDBC clothing. This means you would have to configure your system for correct ODBC function, and then use a JAR file to access ODBC. Due to the extra "hop" of data through ODBC, one would expect it to be a bit slower than a type-4 access; however, there is a possibility that the ODBC is optimized to such a great extent for a particular situation, that the extra hop is negligible. As with most performance concerns, the truth is discovered by testing (in your environment).
The type-2 drivers again use a Java (JDBC) API; however, they bridge the calls into a C or C++ style shared library, which then handles the real connection. If the driver is optimized to be so fast that the JNI setup / tear down calls are negligible in cost, then perhaps it might outperform type-4 drivers.
Type 3 drivers basically proxy (or relay) the request to another network resource. That typically incurs an extra network hit, but again, that doesn't say much about actual performance.
Type 4 drivers are the ones you probably want to stick with. The Java program connects directly to the database, meaning that if there is a problem, it will be captured entirely within the JVM of the program making the connection (type 1, it's in the ODBC layer, type 2 it's in the native compiled code, type 3 it's in the remote network proxy).
Again none of this has to do with functionality; however, they all impact how to deploy, how to debug, and how to configure the database connection.