1960 Cadillac Brougham vs. 1984 Lotus Etna
To start off, 1984 Lotus Etna is newer by 24 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1960 Cadillac Brougham. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1960 Cadillac Brougham would be higher. At 6,390 cc (8 cylinders), 1960 Cadillac Brougham is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1984 Lotus Etna (331 HP @ 6500 RPM) has 121 more horse power than 1960 Cadillac Brougham. (210 HP @ 4800 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1984 Lotus Etna should accelerate faster than 1960 Cadillac Brougham.
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, 1960 Cadillac Brougham (591 Nm) has 183 more torque (in Nm) than 1984 Lotus Etna. (408 Nm). This means 1960 Cadillac Brougham will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1984 Lotus Etna.
Compare all specifications:
| 1960 Cadillac Brougham | 1984 Lotus Etna | |
| Make | Cadillac | Lotus |
| Model | Brougham | Etna |
| Year Released | 1960 | 1984 |
| Engine Position | Front | Middle |
| Engine Size | 6390 cc | 3946 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 210 HP | 331 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4800 RPM | 6500 RPM |
| Torque | 591 Nm | 408 Nm |
| Engine Bore Size | 101.6 mm | 95.2 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 98.4 mm | 69.3 mm |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 2 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 5730 mm | 4270 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 2040 mm | 1850 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1420 mm | 1150 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3310 mm | 2520 mm |
