1984 Audi 200 vs. 2012 Cadillac CTS
To start off, 2012 Cadillac CTS is newer by 28 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1984 Audi 200. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1984 Audi 200 would be higher. At 3,000 cc (6 cylinders), 2012 Cadillac CTS is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2012 Cadillac CTS weights approximately 488 kg more than 1984 Audi 200.
Because 2012 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 2012 Cadillac CTS. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1984 Audi 200, 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:
1984 Audi 200 | 2012 Cadillac CTS | |
Make | Audi | Cadillac |
Model | 200 | CTS |
Year Released | 1984 | 2012 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2144 cc | 3000 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 5 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Horse Power | 0 HP | 270 HP |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Front | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | 6-speed manual |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Vehicle Weight | 1260 kg | 1748 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4800 mm | 4877 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1820 mm | 1842 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1430 mm | 1473 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2700 mm | 2880 mm |