1996 Alfa Romeo 164 vs. 2013 Cadillac CTS
To start off, 2013 Cadillac CTS is newer by 17 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1996 Alfa Romeo 164. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1996 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 395 kg more than 1996 Alfa Romeo 164.
Because 2013 Cadillac CTS is all wheel drive (AWD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1996 Alfa Romeo 164. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2013 Cadillac CTS 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.
Compare all specifications:
1996 Alfa Romeo 164 | 2013 Cadillac CTS | |
Make | Alfa Romeo | Cadillac |
Model | 164 | CTS |
Year Released | 1996 | 2013 |
Body Type | Sedan | Station Wagon |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2968 cc | 3000 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Horse Power | 0 HP | 266 HP |
Drive Type | Front | AWD |
Transmission Type | Automatic | 6-speed automatic |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1510 kg | 1905 kg |