1986 Cadillac Brougham vs. 2004 Ford Ecosport
To start off, 2004 Ford Ecosport is newer by 18 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1986 Cadillac Brougham. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1986 Cadillac Brougham would be higher. At 5,030 cc (8 cylinders), 1986 Cadillac Brougham is equipped with a bigger engine.
Because 1986 Cadillac Brougham 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 1986 Cadillac Brougham. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2004 Ford Ecosport, 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:
| 1986 Cadillac Brougham | 2004 Ford Ecosport | |
| Make | Cadillac | Ford |
| Model | Brougham | Ecosport |
| Year Released | 1986 | 2004 |
| Body Type | Sedan | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 5030 cc | 1600 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 109 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 5630 mm | 4228 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1950 mm | 1980 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3090 mm | 2490 mm |
