1995 Alfa Romeo 164 vs. 2013 Cadillac CTS
To start off, 2013 Cadillac CTS is newer by 18 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 3,000 cc (6 cylinders), 2013 Cadillac CTS is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2013 Cadillac CTS weights approximately 339 kg more than 1995 Alfa Romeo 164.
Because 2013 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 2013 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.
Compare all specifications:
| 1995 Alfa Romeo 164 | 2013 Cadillac CTS | |
| Make | Alfa Romeo | Cadillac |
| Model | 164 | CTS |
| Year Released | 1995 | 2013 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Station Wagon |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2959 cc | 3000 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 266 HP |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | 6-speed automatic |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1482 kg | 1821 kg |
| Wheelbase Size | 2710 mm | 2880 mm |
