1948 Alfa Romeo 6C vs. 2004 Cadillac CTS
To start off, 2004 Cadillac CTS is newer by 56 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1948 Alfa Romeo 6C. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1948 Alfa Romeo 6C would be higher. At 3,179 cc (6 cylinders), 2004 Cadillac CTS is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Cadillac CTS (220 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 131 more horse power than 1948 Alfa Romeo 6C. (89 HP @ 4600 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2004 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 1948 Alfa Romeo 6C. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2004 Cadillac CTS weights approximately 92 kg more than 1948 Alfa Romeo 6C. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
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:
1948 Alfa Romeo 6C | 2004 Cadillac CTS | |
Make | Alfa Romeo | Cadillac |
Model | 6C | CTS |
Year Released | 1948 | 2004 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2442 cc | 3179 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 89 HP | 220 HP |
Engine RPM | 4600 RPM | 6000 RPM |
Engine Bore Size | 72 mm | 87 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 100 mm | 88 mm |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1500 kg | 1592 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4880 mm | 4840 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1840 mm | 1800 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1510 mm | 1450 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3010 mm | 2890 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 77 L | 66 L |