1954 Austin-Healey Tickford vs. 2003 Cadillac CTS
To start off, 2003 Cadillac CTS is newer by 49 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1954 Austin-Healey Tickford. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1954 Austin-Healey Tickford would be higher. At 2,597 cc (6 cylinders), 2003 Cadillac CTS is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2003 Cadillac CTS (179 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 74 more horse power than 1954 Austin-Healey Tickford. (105 HP @ 4800 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2003 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 1954 Austin-Healey Tickford. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2003 Cadillac CTS weights approximately 90 kg more than 1954 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, 2003 Cadillac CTS (245 Nm @ 3400 RPM) has 61 more torque (in Nm) than 1954 Austin-Healey Tickford. (184 Nm @ 3000 RPM). This means 2003 Cadillac CTS will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1954 Austin-Healey Tickford.
Compare all specifications:
| 1954 Austin-Healey Tickford | 2003 Cadillac CTS | |
| Make | Austin-Healey | Cadillac |
| Model | Tickford | CTS |
| Year Released | 1954 | 2003 |
| Engine Size | 2443 cc | 2597 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 105 HP | 179 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4800 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Torque | 184 Nm | 245 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3000 RPM | 3400 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Vehicle Weight | 1530 kg | 1620 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4500 mm | 4840 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1710 mm | 1800 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1400 mm | 1450 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2600 mm | 2890 mm |
