1967 Cadillac Eldorado vs. 1985 Ford RS 200
To start off, 1985 Ford RS 200 is newer by 18 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1967 Cadillac Eldorado. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1967 Cadillac Eldorado would be higher. At 7,029 cc (8 cylinders), 1967 Cadillac Eldorado is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1985 Ford RS 200 (247 HP @ 6500 RPM) has 39 more horse power than 1967 Cadillac Eldorado. (208 HP @ 4600 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1985 Ford RS 200 should accelerate faster than 1967 Cadillac Eldorado. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1967 Cadillac Eldorado weights approximately 902 kg more than 1985 Ford RS 200.
Because 1985 Ford RS 200 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 1985 Ford RS 200. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1967 Cadillac Eldorado, 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:
| 1967 Cadillac Eldorado | 1985 Ford RS 200 | |
| Make | Cadillac | Ford |
| Model | Eldorado | RS 200 |
| Year Released | 1967 | 1985 |
| Body Type | Coupe | Coupe |
| Engine Position | Front | Middle |
| Engine Size | 7029 cc | 1804 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 208 HP | 247 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4600 RPM | 6500 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 2 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 2082 kg | 1180 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5620 mm | 4000 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 2040 mm | 1770 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1370 mm | 1330 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3050 mm | 2520 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 82 L | 116 L |
