1966 Abarth 1300 vs. 2010 Cadillac BLS
To start off, 2010 Cadillac BLS is newer by 44 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1966 Abarth 1300. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1966 Abarth 1300 would be higher. At 2,792 cc, 2010 Cadillac BLS is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2010 Cadillac BLS (247 HP @ 5500 RPM) has 110 more horse power than 1966 Abarth 1300. (137 HP @ 7600 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Cadillac BLS should accelerate faster than 1966 Abarth 1300. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2010 Cadillac BLS weights approximately 930 kg more than 1966 Abarth 1300. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 1966 Abarth 1300 is rear wheel drive (RWD), it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, it will be much easier to do with 1966 Abarth 1300. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2010 Cadillac BLS, being front wheel drive (FWD), will offer much better control with better grip. 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:
1966 Abarth 1300 | 2010 Cadillac BLS | |
Make | Abarth | Cadillac |
Model | 1300 | BLS |
Year Released | 1966 | 2010 |
Engine Position | Rear | Front |
Engine Size | 1280 cc | 2792 cc |
Horse Power | 137 HP | 247 HP |
Engine RPM | 7600 RPM | 5500 RPM |
Engine Compression Ratio | 10.6:1 | 9.5:1 |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline - Premium |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 630 kg | 1560 kg |
Vehicle Length | 3560 mm | 4690 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1490 mm | 1460 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1140 mm | 1770 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2100 mm | 2680 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 30 L | 58 L |