1963 AC Greyhound vs. 2010 Cadillac CTS
To start off, 2010 Cadillac CTS is newer by 47 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1963 AC Greyhound. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1963 AC Greyhound would be higher. At 3,000 cc (6 cylinders), 2010 Cadillac CTS is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2010 Cadillac CTS (270 HP @ 7000 RPM) has 147 more horse power than 1963 AC Greyhound. (123 HP @ 5750 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 1963 AC Greyhound. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2010 Cadillac CTS weights approximately 741 kg more than 1963 AC Greyhound. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Let's talk about torque, 2010 Cadillac CTS (302 Nm) has 123 more torque (in Nm) than 1963 AC Greyhound. (179 Nm). This means 2010 Cadillac CTS will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1963 AC Greyhound.
Compare all specifications:
| 1963 AC Greyhound | 2010 Cadillac CTS | |
| Make | AC | Cadillac |
| Model | Greyhound | CTS |
| Year Released | 1963 | 2010 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1971 cc | 3000 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 123 HP | 270 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5750 RPM | 7000 RPM |
| Torque | 179 Nm | 302 Nm |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1015 kg | 1756 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4580 mm | 4867 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1670 mm | 1842 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1340 mm | 1504 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2550 mm | 2880 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 54 L | 68 L |
