1991 Audi 80 vs. 2009 Cadillac DTS
To start off, 2009 Cadillac DTS is newer by 18 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1991 Audi 80. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1991 Audi 80 would be higher. At 4,565 cc (8 cylinders), 2009 Cadillac DTS is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Cadillac DTS (271 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 157 more horse power than 1991 Audi 80. (114 HP @ 5400 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Cadillac DTS should accelerate faster than 1991 Audi 80.
Because 1991 Audi 80 is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2009 Cadillac DTS. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1991 Audi 80 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. Let's talk about torque, 2009 Cadillac DTS (296 Nm @ 4400 RPM) has 129 more torque (in Nm) than 1991 Audi 80. (167 Nm @ 3200 RPM). This means 2009 Cadillac DTS will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1991 Audi 80. 2009 Cadillac DTS has automatic transmission and 1991 Audi 80 has manual transmission. 1991 Audi 80 will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2009 Cadillac DTS will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 1991 Audi 80 | 2009 Cadillac DTS | |
| Make | Audi | Cadillac |
| Model | 80 | DTS |
| Year Released | 1991 | 2009 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1984 cc | 4565 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 114 HP | 271 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5400 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Torque | 167 Nm | 296 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3200 RPM | 4400 RPM |
| Drive Type | 4WD | Front |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 6 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Width | 1700 mm | 1910 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 8.1 L/100km | 10.2 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 12.7 L/100km | 15.7 L/100km |
