1981 Mitsubishi Celeste vs. 2009 Cadillac BLS
To start off, 2009 Cadillac BLS is newer by 28 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1981 Mitsubishi Celeste. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1981 Mitsubishi Celeste would be higher. At 1,910 cc (4 cylinders), 2009 Cadillac BLS is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2009 Cadillac BLS weights approximately 655 kg more than 1981 Mitsubishi Celeste.
Because 1981 Mitsubishi Celeste 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 1981 Mitsubishi Celeste. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2009 Cadillac BLS, 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. 2009 Cadillac BLS has automatic transmission and 1981 Mitsubishi Celeste has manual transmission. 1981 Mitsubishi Celeste will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2009 Cadillac BLS will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 1981 Mitsubishi Celeste | 2009 Cadillac BLS | |
| Make | Mitsubishi | Cadillac |
| Model | Celeste | BLS |
| Year Released | 1981 | 2009 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1597 cc | 1910 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 179 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Diesel |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Automatic |
| Vehicle Weight | 945 kg | 1600 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4160 mm | 4720 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1620 mm | 1760 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1350 mm | 1550 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2350 mm | 2680 mm |
