1986 Ford Ranger vs. 2012 Cadillac CTS
To start off, 2012 Cadillac CTS is newer by 26 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1986 Ford Ranger. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1986 Ford Ranger would be higher. At 3,600 cc (6 cylinders), 2012 Cadillac CTS is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2012 Cadillac CTS (318 HP @ 6800 RPM) has 209 more horse power than 1986 Ford Ranger. (109 HP @ 4800 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2012 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 1986 Ford Ranger.
Because 1986 Ford Ranger is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2012 Cadillac CTS. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1986 Ford Ranger 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. 2012 Cadillac CTS has automatic transmission and 1986 Ford Ranger has manual transmission. 1986 Ford Ranger will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2012 Cadillac CTS will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
1986 Ford Ranger | 2012 Cadillac CTS | |
Make | Ford | Cadillac |
Model | Ranger | CTS |
Year Released | 1986 | 2012 |
Body Type | Pickup | Station Wagon |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2300 cc | 3600 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Horse Power | 109 HP | 318 HP |
Engine RPM | 4800 RPM | 6800 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | 4WD | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | 6-speed shiftable automatic |
Vehicle Length | 4690 mm | 4877 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1770 mm | 1842 mm |