1969 Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow vs. 2010 Cadillac CTS
To start off, 2010 Cadillac CTS is newer by 41 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1969 Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1969 Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow would be higher. At 6,230 cc (8 cylinders), 1969 Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1969 Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow weights approximately 344 kg more than 2010 Cadillac CTS.
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:
| 1969 Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow | 2010 Cadillac CTS | |
| Make | Rolls-Royce | Cadillac |
| Model | Silver Shadow | CTS |
| Year Released | 1969 | 2010 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 6230 cc | 3000 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 270 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 2100 kg | 1756 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5180 mm | 4867 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1810 mm | 1842 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1520 mm | 1504 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3040 mm | 2880 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 109 L | 68 L |
