1952 BMW 340 vs. 2002 Cadillac CTS
To start off, 2002 Cadillac CTS is newer by 50 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1952 BMW 340. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1952 BMW 340 would be higher. At 3,179 cc (6 cylinders), 2002 Cadillac CTS is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2002 Cadillac CTS (210 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 157 more horse power than 1952 BMW 340. (53 HP @ 3750 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2002 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 1952 BMW 340. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2002 Cadillac CTS weights approximately 310 kg more than 1952 BMW 340. 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:
| 1952 BMW 340 | 2002 Cadillac CTS | |
| Make | BMW | Cadillac |
| Model | 340 | CTS |
| Year Released | 1952 | 2002 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1971 cc | 3179 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 53 HP | 210 HP |
| Engine RPM | 3750 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 1250 kg | 1560 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4610 mm | 4840 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1770 mm | 1800 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1640 mm | 1450 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2880 mm | 2940 mm |
