1965 Abarth 1300 vs. 2002 Cadillac CTS
To start off, 2002 Cadillac CTS is newer by 37 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1965 Abarth 1300. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1965 Abarth 1300 would be higher. At 3,179 cc (6 cylinders), 2002 Cadillac CTS is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2002 Cadillac CTS (210 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 73 more horse power than 1965 Abarth 1300. (137 HP @ 7600 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2002 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 1965 Abarth 1300. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2002 Cadillac CTS weights approximately 930 kg more than 1965 Abarth 1300. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
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.
Compare all specifications:
1965 Abarth 1300 | 2002 Cadillac CTS | |
Make | Abarth | Cadillac |
Model | 1300 | CTS |
Year Released | 1965 | 2002 |
Engine Position | Rear | Front |
Engine Size | 1280 cc | 3179 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Horse Power | 137 HP | 210 HP |
Engine RPM | 7600 RPM | 6000 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 630 kg | 1560 kg |
Vehicle Length | 3560 mm | 4840 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1490 mm | 1800 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1140 mm | 1450 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2100 mm | 2940 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 30 L | 68 L |