1969 Austin 3-Litre vs. 2006 Cadillac STS
To start off, 2006 Cadillac STS is newer by 37 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1969 Austin 3-Litre. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1969 Austin 3-Litre would be higher. At 4,556 cc (8 cylinders), 2006 Cadillac STS is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Cadillac STS (320 HP @ 6400 RPM) has 196 more horse power than 1969 Austin 3-Litre. (124 HP @ 4500 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2006 Cadillac STS should accelerate faster than 1969 Austin 3-Litre.
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, 2006 Cadillac STS (428 Nm @ 4400 RPM) has 210 more torque (in Nm) than 1969 Austin 3-Litre. (218 Nm @ 3000 RPM). This means 2006 Cadillac STS will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1969 Austin 3-Litre.
Compare all specifications:
| 1969 Austin 3-Litre | 2006 Cadillac STS | |
| Make | Austin | Cadillac |
| Model | 3-Litre | STS |
| Year Released | 1969 | 2006 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2912 cc | 4556 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 124 HP | 320 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4500 RPM | 6400 RPM |
| Torque | 218 Nm | 428 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3000 RPM | 4400 RPM |
| Engine Bore Size | 83.4 mm | 93 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 88.9 mm | 84 mm |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4720 mm | 4990 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1700 mm | 1850 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1470 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2940 mm | 2960 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 65 L | 64 L |
