1971 BMW 2002 vs. 2009 Cadillac CTS
To start off, 2009 Cadillac CTS is newer by 38 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1971 BMW 2002. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1971 BMW 2002 would be higher. At 3,175 cc (6 cylinders), 2009 Cadillac CTS is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Cadillac CTS (215 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 75 more horse power than 1971 BMW 2002. (140 HP @ 6000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 1971 BMW 2002.
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, 2009 Cadillac CTS (300 Nm) has 103 more torque (in Nm) than 1971 BMW 2002. (197 Nm). This means 2009 Cadillac CTS will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1971 BMW 2002.
Compare all specifications:
| 1971 BMW 2002 | 2009 Cadillac CTS | |
| Make | BMW | Cadillac |
| Model | 2002 | CTS |
| Year Released | 1971 | 2009 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1983 cc | 3175 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 140 HP | 215 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Torque | 197 Nm | 300 Nm |
| Engine Bore Size | 88.9 mm | 87.5 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 80 mm | 88 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 8.5:1 | 10.0:1 |
| Top Speed | 185 km/hour | 238 km/hour |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Length | 4240 mm | 4830 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1600 mm | 1800 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1420 mm | 1450 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2510 mm | 2890 mm |
