1953 Austin-Healey Tickford vs. 2010 Cadillac CTS
To start off, 2010 Cadillac CTS is newer by 57 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1953 Austin-Healey Tickford. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1953 Austin-Healey Tickford would be higher. At 3,000 cc (6 cylinders), 2010 Cadillac CTS is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2010 Cadillac CTS (270 HP @ 7000 RPM) has 165 more horse power than 1953 Austin-Healey Tickford. (105 HP @ 4800 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 1953 Austin-Healey Tickford. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2010 Cadillac CTS weights approximately 226 kg more than 1953 Austin-Healey Tickford. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Let's talk about torque, 2010 Cadillac CTS (302 Nm @ 5700 RPM) has 117 more torque (in Nm) than 1953 Austin-Healey Tickford. (185 Nm @ 3000 RPM). This means 2010 Cadillac CTS will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1953 Austin-Healey Tickford.
Compare all specifications:
1953 Austin-Healey Tickford | 2010 Cadillac CTS | |
Make | Austin-Healey | Cadillac |
Model | Tickford | CTS |
Year Released | 1953 | 2010 |
Body Type | Sedan | Station Wagon |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2443 cc | 3000 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 105 HP | 270 HP |
Engine RPM | 4800 RPM | 7000 RPM |
Torque | 185 Nm | 302 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3000 RPM | 5700 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Vehicle Weight | 1530 kg | 1756 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4500 mm | 4867 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1710 mm | 1842 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1400 mm | 1504 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2600 mm | 2880 mm |