1966 Alpine A 110 vs. 2005 Cadillac CTS
To start off, 2005 Cadillac CTS is newer by 39 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1966 Alpine A 110. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1966 Alpine A 110 would be higher. At 3,564 cc (6 cylinders), 2005 Cadillac CTS is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2005 Cadillac CTS (255 HP) has 160 more horse power than 1966 Alpine A 110. (95 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2005 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 1966 Alpine A 110. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2005 Cadillac CTS weights approximately 1047 kg more than 1966 Alpine A 110. 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:
1966 Alpine A 110 | 2005 Cadillac CTS | |
Make | Alpine | Cadillac |
Model | A 110 | CTS |
Year Released | 1966 | 2005 |
Body Type | Coupe | Sedan |
Engine Position | Rear | Front |
Engine Size | 1108 cc | 3564 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Horse Power | 95 HP | 255 HP |
Engine Bore Size | 70 mm | 94 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 72 mm | 86 mm |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 545 kg | 1592 kg |
Vehicle Length | 3860 mm | 4840 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1560 mm | 1800 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1120 mm | 1450 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2110 mm | 2890 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 62 L | 64 L |