1955 BMW 502 vs. 2003 Cadillac CTS
To start off, 2003 Cadillac CTS is newer by 48 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1955 BMW 502. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1955 BMW 502 would be higher. At 3,563 cc (6 cylinders), 2003 Cadillac CTS is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2003 Cadillac CTS (252 HP @ 6200 RPM) has 152 more horse power than 1955 BMW 502. (100 HP @ 4800 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2003 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 1955 BMW 502. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2003 Cadillac CTS weights approximately 265 kg more than 1955 BMW 502. 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:
| 1955 BMW 502 | 2003 Cadillac CTS | |
| Make | BMW | Cadillac |
| Model | 502 | CTS |
| Year Released | 1955 | 2003 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2580 cc | 3563 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 100 HP | 252 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4800 RPM | 6200 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1410 kg | 1675 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4740 mm | 4840 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1780 mm | 1800 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1540 mm | 1450 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2840 mm | 2890 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 70 L | 64 L |
