1965 Alfa Romeo 2600 vs. 2013 Cadillac CTS
To start off, 2013 Cadillac CTS is newer by 48 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 3,600 cc (6 cylinders), 2013 Cadillac CTS is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2013 Cadillac CTS (314 HP @ 6800 RPM) has 169 more horse power than 1965 Alfa Romeo 2600. (145 HP @ 5900 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2013 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 1965 Alfa Romeo 2600. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2013 Cadillac CTS weights approximately 551 kg more than 1965 Alfa Romeo 2600. 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. Let's talk about torque, 2013 Cadillac CTS (373 Nm @ 4900 RPM) has 157 more torque (in Nm) than 1965 Alfa Romeo 2600. (216 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 2013 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 | 2013 Cadillac CTS | |
Make | Alfa Romeo | Cadillac |
Model | 2600 | CTS |
Year Released | 1965 | 2013 |
Body Type | Convertible | Coupe |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2582 cc | 3600 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 145 HP | 314 HP |
Engine RPM | 5900 RPM | 6800 RPM |
Torque | 216 Nm | 373 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4000 RPM | 4900 RPM |
Engine Bore Size | 83 mm | 94 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 79.6 mm | 86 mm |
Engine Compression Ratio | 9.0:1 | 11.3 |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Number of Seats | 2 seats | 4 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1217 kg | 1768 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4500 mm | 4788 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1660 mm | 1882 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1330 mm | 1442 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2590 mm | 2880 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 100 L | 68 L |