1965 Ford Mustang 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 Ford Mustang. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1965 Ford Mustang would be higher. At 4,733 cc (8 cylinders), 1965 Ford Mustang is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Cadillac CTS (252 HP @ 6200 RPM) has 44 more horse power than 1965 Ford Mustang. (208 HP @ 4400 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2006 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 1965 Ford Mustang. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2006 Cadillac CTS weights approximately 581 kg more than 1965 Ford Mustang. 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 Ford Mustang | 2006 Cadillac CTS | |
| Make | Ford | Cadillac |
| Model | Mustang | CTS |
| Year Released | 1965 | 2006 |
| Body Type | Coupe | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4733 cc | 3564 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Horse Power | 208 HP | 252 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4400 RPM | 6200 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline - Premium |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1165 kg | 1746 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4620 mm | 4830 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1740 mm | 1800 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1310 mm | 1450 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2750 mm | 2890 mm |
