1990 BMW 316 vs. 2006 Cadillac CTS
To start off, 2006 Cadillac CTS is newer by 16 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1990 BMW 316. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1990 BMW 316 would be higher. At 5,965 cc, 2006 Cadillac CTS is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Cadillac CTS (400 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 300 more horse power than 1990 BMW 316. (100 HP @ 5500 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2006 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 1990 BMW 316.
Both vehicles are rear wheel drive (RWD) - it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, both vehicles do the job better than front wheel drive vehicles. 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. Let's talk about torque, 2006 Cadillac CTS (536 Nm @ 4400 RPM) has 395 more torque (in Nm) than 1990 BMW 316. (141 Nm @ 4250 RPM). This means 2006 Cadillac CTS will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1990 BMW 316.
Compare all specifications:
| 1990 BMW 316 | 2006 Cadillac CTS | |
| Make | BMW | Cadillac |
| Model | 316 | CTS |
| Year Released | 1990 | 2006 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1596 cc | 5965 cc |
| Horse Power | 100 HP | 400 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5500 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Torque | 141 Nm | 536 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4250 RPM | 4400 RPM |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4330 mm | 4870 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1650 mm | 1800 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1390 mm | 1460 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2580 mm | 2890 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 70 L | 64 L |
