1996 Alfa Romeo 164 vs. 2013 Cadillac ESCALADE
To start off, 2013 Cadillac ESCALADE 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 6,200 cc (8 cylinders), 2013 Cadillac ESCALADE is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2013 Cadillac ESCALADE weights approximately 1115 kg more than 1996 Alfa Romeo 164.
Because 2013 Cadillac ESCALADE 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 ESCALADE. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1996 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:
1996 Alfa Romeo 164 | 2013 Cadillac ESCALADE | |
Make | Alfa Romeo | Cadillac |
Model | 164 | ESCALADE |
Year Released | 1996 | 2013 |
Body Type | Sedan | SUV |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2968 cc | 6200 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Horse Power | 0 HP | 397 HP |
Drive Type | Front | Rear |
Transmission Type | Automatic | 6-speed automatic |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 7 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1510 kg | 2625 kg |