1981 Austin Allegro vs. 2012 Cadillac CTS
To start off, 2012 Cadillac CTS is newer by 31 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1981 Austin Allegro. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1981 Austin Allegro would be higher. At 3,600 cc (6 cylinders), 2012 Cadillac CTS is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2012 Cadillac CTS weights approximately 928 kg more than 1981 Austin Allegro.
Because 2012 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 2012 Cadillac CTS. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1981 Austin Allegro, 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. 2012 Cadillac CTS has automatic transmission and 1981 Austin Allegro has manual transmission. 1981 Austin Allegro will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2012 Cadillac CTS will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 1981 Austin Allegro | 2012 Cadillac CTS | |
| Make | Austin | Cadillac |
| Model | Allegro | CTS |
| Year Released | 1981 | 2012 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1275 cc | 3600 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 318 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | 6-speed shiftable automatic |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 850 kg | 1778 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4000 mm | 4788 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1620 mm | 1842 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1430 mm | 1422 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2450 mm | 2880 mm |
