1968 AMC AMX vs. 2010 Cadillac CTS
To start off, 2010 Cadillac CTS is newer by 42 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, 1968 AMC AMX (315 HP @ 4600 RPM) has 11 more horse power than 2010 Cadillac CTS. (304 HP @ 6400 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1968 AMC AMX should accelerate faster than 2010 Cadillac CTS. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2010 Cadillac CTS weights approximately 380 kg more 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 206 more torque (in Nm) than 2010 Cadillac CTS. (370 Nm @ 5200 RPM). This means 1968 AMC AMX will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2010 Cadillac CTS.
Compare all specifications:
1968 AMC AMX | 2010 Cadillac CTS | |
Make | AMC | Cadillac |
Model | AMX | CTS |
Year Released | 1968 | 2010 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 6386 cc | 3600 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Horse Power | 315 HP | 304 HP |
Engine RPM | 4600 RPM | 6400 RPM |
Torque | 576 Nm | 370 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3200 RPM | 5200 RPM |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1377 kg | 1757 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4510 mm | 4867 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1830 mm | 1842 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1320 mm | 1473 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2470 mm | 2880 mm |