1978 Audi 50 vs. 2003 Cadillac CTS
To start off, 2003 Cadillac CTS is newer by 25 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1978 Audi 50. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1978 Audi 50 would be higher. At 3,563 cc (6 cylinders), 2003 Cadillac CTS is equipped with a bigger engine.
Because 2003 Cadillac CTS is rear wheel drive (RWD), it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, it will be much easier to do with 2003 Cadillac CTS. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1978 Audi 50, being front wheel drive (FWD), will offer much better control with better grip. 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:
| 1978 Audi 50 | 2003 Cadillac CTS | |
| Make | Audi | Cadillac |
| Model | 50 | CTS |
| Year Released | 1978 | 2003 |
| Body Type | Hatchback | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 771 cc | 3563 cc |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 252 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Transmission Type | 4-speed manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 3 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 3510 mm | 4840 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1570 mm | 1800 mm |
