1952 Buick 40 vs. 2009 Cadillac STS
To start off, 2009 Cadillac STS is newer by 57 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1952 Buick 40. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1952 Buick 40 would be higher. At 4,066 cc (8 cylinders), 1952 Buick 40 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Cadillac STS (302 HP @ 6300 RPM) has 184 more horse power than 1952 Buick 40. (118 HP @ 3600 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Cadillac STS should accelerate faster than 1952 Buick 40.
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. Let's talk about torque, 2009 Cadillac STS (369 Nm @ 5200 RPM) has 77 more torque (in Nm) than 1952 Buick 40. (292 Nm @ 2000 RPM). This means 2009 Cadillac STS will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1952 Buick 40.
Compare all specifications:
1952 Buick 40 | 2009 Cadillac STS | |
Make | Buick | Cadillac |
Model | 40 | STS |
Year Released | 1952 | 2009 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 4066 cc | 3599 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 118 HP | 302 HP |
Engine RPM | 3600 RPM | 6300 RPM |
Torque | 292 Nm | 369 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2000 RPM | 5200 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Vehicle Weight | 1635 kg | 1635 kg |
Vehicle Width | 1950 mm | 1850 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3090 mm | 2960 mm |