1982 Bristol Brigand vs. 2013 Cadillac ATS
To start off, 2013 Cadillac ATS is newer by 31 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. 1982 Bristol Brigand weights approximately 228 kg more than 2013 Cadillac ATS.
Because 2013 Cadillac ATS is all wheel drive (AWD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1982 Bristol Brigand. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2013 Cadillac ATS will offer significantly more control. 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 | 2013 Cadillac ATS | |
Make | Bristol | Cadillac |
Model | Brigand | ATS |
Year Released | 1982 | 2013 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 5898 cc | 2000 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 0 HP | 268 HP |
Engine Bore Size | 101.6 mm | 86 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 90.9 mm | 86 mm |
Engine Compression Ratio | 8.0:1 | 9.5 |
Drive Type | Rear | AWD |
Transmission Type | Automatic | 6-speed automatic |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1758 kg | 1530 kg |
Vehicle Length | 5010 mm | 4643 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1780 mm | 1806 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1420 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2910 mm | 2776 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 82 L | 61 L |