1995 Alfa Romeo 164 vs. 2004 Cadillac CTS
To start off, 2004 Cadillac CTS is newer by 9 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1995 Alfa Romeo 164. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1995 Alfa Romeo 164 would be higher. At 2,959 cc (6 cylinders), 1995 Alfa Romeo 164 is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2004 Cadillac CTS weights approximately 138 kg more than 1995 Alfa Romeo 164.
Because 2004 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 2004 Cadillac CTS. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1995 Alfa Romeo 164, 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. 1995 Alfa Romeo 164 has automatic transmission and 2004 Cadillac CTS has manual transmission. 2004 Cadillac CTS will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 1995 Alfa Romeo 164 will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 1995 Alfa Romeo 164 | 2004 Cadillac CTS | |
| Make | Alfa Romeo | Cadillac |
| Model | 164 | CTS |
| Year Released | 1995 | 2004 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2959 cc | 2597 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 179 HP |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1482 kg | 1620 kg |
| Wheelbase Size | 2710 mm | 2890 mm |
