1982 Bristol Brigand vs. 2006 Cadillac STS
To start off, 2006 Cadillac STS is newer by 24 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1982 Bristol Brigand. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1982 Bristol Brigand would be higher. At 5,898 cc (8 cylinders), 1982 Bristol Brigand is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2006 Cadillac STS weights approximately 24 kg more than 1982 Bristol Brigand.
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 Bristol Brigand | 2006 Cadillac STS | |
| Make | Bristol | Cadillac |
| Model | Brigand | STS |
| Year Released | 1982 | 2006 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 5898 cc | 3563 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 253 HP |
| Engine Bore Size | 101.6 mm | 94 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 90.9 mm | 85.6 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 8.0:1 | 10.2:1 |
| Top Speed | 241 km/hour | 229 km/hour |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1758 kg | 1782 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5010 mm | 4990 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1780 mm | 1850 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1470 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2910 mm | 2960 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 82 L | 66 L |
