1961 Austin Mini Cooper vs. 2009 Cadillac CTS
To start off, 2009 Cadillac CTS is newer by 48 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1961 Austin Mini Cooper. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1961 Austin Mini Cooper 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 205 more horse power than 1961 Austin Mini Cooper. (54 HP @ 6000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 1961 Austin Mini Cooper.
Because 2009 Cadillac CTS is rear wheel drive (RWD), it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, it will be much easier to do with 2009 Cadillac CTS. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1961 Austin Mini Cooper, being front wheel drive (FWD), will offer much better control with better grip. 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 179 more torque (in Nm) than 1961 Austin Mini Cooper. (74 Nm @ 3600 RPM). This means 2009 Cadillac CTS will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1961 Austin Mini Cooper.
Compare all specifications:
1961 Austin Mini Cooper | 2009 Cadillac CTS | |
Make | Austin | Cadillac |
Model | Mini Cooper | CTS |
Year Released | 1961 | 2009 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 948 cc | 3564 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Horse Power | 54 HP | 259 HP |
Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 6200 RPM |
Torque | 74 Nm | 253 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3600 RPM | 3100 RPM |
Engine Bore Size | 62.4 mm | 94 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 81.3 mm | 85 mm |
Drive Type | Front | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |