1982 BMW 316 vs. 2003 Cadillac CTS-V
To start off, 2003 Cadillac CTS-V is newer by 21 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1982 BMW 316. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1982 BMW 316 would be higher. At 5,666 cc (8 cylinders), 2003 Cadillac CTS-V is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2003 Cadillac CTS-V (400 HP) has 311 more horse power than 1982 BMW 316. (89 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2003 Cadillac CTS-V should accelerate faster than 1982 BMW 316.
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:
| 1982 BMW 316 | 2003 Cadillac CTS-V | |
| Make | BMW | Cadillac |
| Model | 316 | CTS-V |
| Year Released | 1982 | 2003 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1573 cc | 5666 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 89 HP | 400 HP |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4330 mm | 4870 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1650 mm | 1800 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1390 mm | 1460 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2580 mm | 2890 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 55 L | 66 L |
