1961 Austin 7 vs. 2002 Cadillac CTS
To start off, 2002 Cadillac CTS is newer by 41 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1961 Austin 7. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1961 Austin 7 would be higher. At 3,173 cc (6 cylinders), 2002 Cadillac CTS is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2002 Cadillac CTS (220 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 187 more horse power than 1961 Austin 7. (33 HP @ 5500 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2002 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 1961 Austin 7. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2002 Cadillac CTS weights approximately 1008 kg more than 1961 Austin 7. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Let's talk about torque, 2002 Cadillac CTS (296 Nm @ 3400 RPM) has 236 more torque (in Nm) than 1961 Austin 7. (60 Nm @ 3600 RPM). This means 2002 Cadillac CTS will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1961 Austin 7.
Compare all specifications:
1961 Austin 7 | 2002 Cadillac CTS | |
Make | Austin | Cadillac |
Model | 7 | CTS |
Year Released | 1961 | 2002 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 848 cc | 3173 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Horse Power | 33 HP | 220 HP |
Engine RPM | 5500 RPM | 6000 RPM |
Torque | 60 Nm | 296 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3600 RPM | 3400 RPM |
Engine Compression Ratio | 8.3:1 | 10.0:1 |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 610 kg | 1618 kg |
Vehicle Length | 3060 mm | 4840 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1450 mm | 1800 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1360 mm | 1450 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2040 mm | 2900 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 72 L | 66 L |