1996 AC Cobra vs. 2009 Cadillac CTS-V
To start off, 2009 Cadillac CTS-V is newer by 13 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1996 AC Cobra. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1996 AC Cobra would be higher. At 6,162 cc (8 cylinders), 2009 Cadillac CTS-V is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Cadillac CTS-V (542 HP @ 6200 RPM) has 177 more horse power than 1996 AC Cobra. (365 HP @ 5750 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Cadillac CTS-V should accelerate faster than 1996 AC Cobra.
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, 1996 AC Cobra (579 Nm @ 4500 RPM) has 29 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Cadillac CTS-V. (550 Nm @ 6200 RPM). This means 1996 AC Cobra will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Cadillac CTS-V.
Compare all specifications:
1996 AC Cobra | 2009 Cadillac CTS-V | |
Make | AC | Cadillac |
Model | Cobra | CTS-V |
Year Released | 1996 | 2009 |
Body Type | Roadster | Sedan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 4942 cc | 6162 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 2 valves |
Horse Power | 365 HP | 542 HP |
Engine RPM | 5750 RPM | 6200 RPM |
Torque | 579 Nm | 550 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4500 RPM | 6200 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4210 mm | 4870 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1750 mm | 1850 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1210 mm | 1460 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2300 mm | 2890 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 90 L | 68 L |