1983 Plymouth Reliant vs. 2006 Cadillac CTS
To start off, 2006 Cadillac CTS is newer by 23 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1983 Plymouth Reliant. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1983 Plymouth Reliant would be higher. At 3,564 cc (6 cylinders), 2006 Cadillac CTS is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2006 Cadillac CTS weights approximately 596 kg more than 1983 Plymouth Reliant.
Because 2006 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 2006 Cadillac CTS. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1983 Plymouth Reliant, 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.
Compare all specifications:
| 1983 Plymouth Reliant | 2006 Cadillac CTS | |
| Make | Plymouth | Cadillac |
| Model | Reliant | CTS |
| Year Released | 1983 | 2006 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2500 cc | 3564 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 252 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline - Premium |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 1150 kg | 1746 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4550 mm | 4830 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1740 mm | 1800 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2260 mm | 2890 mm |
