1958 Bristol 406 vs. 2009 Cadillac CTS
To start off, 2009 Cadillac CTS is newer by 51 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1958 Bristol 406. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1958 Bristol 406 would be higher. At 3,564 cc (6 cylinders), 2009 Cadillac CTS is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Cadillac CTS (259 HP @ 6200 RPM) has 168 more horse power than 1958 Bristol 406. (91 HP @ 4700 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 1958 Bristol 406.
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 CTS (253 Nm @ 3100 RPM) has 79 more torque (in Nm) than 1958 Bristol 406. (174 Nm @ 3000 RPM). This means 2009 Cadillac CTS will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1958 Bristol 406.
Compare all specifications:
| 1958 Bristol 406 | 2009 Cadillac CTS | |
| Make | Bristol | Cadillac |
| Model | 406 | CTS |
| Year Released | 1958 | 2009 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2216 cc | 3564 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 91 HP | 259 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4700 RPM | 6200 RPM |
| Torque | 174 Nm | 253 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3000 RPM | 3100 RPM |
| Engine Bore Size | 68.7 mm | 94 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 99.6 mm | 85 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 8.5:1 | 10.2:1 |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
