1957 Alpine A 106 vs. 2004 Cadillac CTS
To start off, 2004 Cadillac CTS is newer by 47 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1957 Alpine A 106. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1957 Alpine A 106 would be higher. At 2,597 cc (6 cylinders), 2004 Cadillac CTS is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Cadillac CTS (179 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 142 more horse power than 1957 Alpine A 106. (37 HP @ 6200 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2004 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 1957 Alpine A 106.
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:
| 1957 Alpine A 106 | 2004 Cadillac CTS | |
| Make | Alpine | Cadillac |
| Model | A 106 | CTS |
| Year Released | 1957 | 2004 |
| Body Type | Coupe | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Rear | Front |
| Engine Size | 904 cc | 2597 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 37 HP | 179 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6200 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline - Premium |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 3700 mm | 4830 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1450 mm | 1800 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1280 mm | 1450 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2110 mm | 2950 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 28 L | 68 L |
