1968 AMC AMX vs. 2006 Cadillac STS
To start off, 2006 Cadillac STS is newer by 38 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1968 AMC AMX. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1968 AMC AMX would be higher. At 6,386 cc (8 cylinders), 1968 AMC AMX is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Cadillac STS (320 HP @ 6400 RPM) has 5 more horse power than 1968 AMC AMX. (315 HP @ 4600 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2006 Cadillac STS should accelerate faster than 1968 AMC AMX.
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, 1968 AMC AMX (576 Nm @ 3200 RPM) has 148 more torque (in Nm) than 2006 Cadillac STS. (428 Nm @ 4400 RPM). This means 1968 AMC AMX will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2006 Cadillac STS.
Compare all specifications:
| 1968 AMC AMX | 2006 Cadillac STS | |
| Make | AMC | Cadillac |
| Model | AMX | STS |
| Year Released | 1968 | 2006 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 6386 cc | 4556 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Horse Power | 315 HP | 320 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4600 RPM | 6400 RPM |
| Torque | 576 Nm | 428 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3200 RPM | 4400 RPM |
| Engine Bore Size | 105.8 mm | 93 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 90.8 mm | 84 mm |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4510 mm | 4990 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1830 mm | 1850 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1320 mm | 1470 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2470 mm | 2960 mm |
