1965 Alfa Romeo 2600 vs. 2006 Cadillac CTS
To start off, 2006 Cadillac CTS is newer by 41 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1965 Alfa Romeo 2600. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1965 Alfa Romeo 2600 would be higher. At 5,965 cc, 2006 Cadillac CTS is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Cadillac CTS (400 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 237 more horse power than 1965 Alfa Romeo 2600. (163 HP @ 5900 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2006 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 1965 Alfa Romeo 2600.
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, 2006 Cadillac CTS (536 Nm @ 4400 RPM) has 316 more torque (in Nm) than 1965 Alfa Romeo 2600. (220 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 2006 Cadillac CTS will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1965 Alfa Romeo 2600.
Compare all specifications:
| 1965 Alfa Romeo 2600 | 2006 Cadillac CTS | |
| Make | Alfa Romeo | Cadillac |
| Model | 2600 | CTS |
| Year Released | 1965 | 2006 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2584 cc | 5965 cc |
| Horse Power | 163 HP | 400 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5900 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Torque | 220 Nm | 536 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4000 RPM | 4400 RPM |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4590 mm | 4870 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1710 mm | 1800 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1390 mm | 1460 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2510 mm | 2890 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 60 L | 64 L |
