1997 Ford Mustang vs. 2010 Cadillac CTS
To start off, 2010 Cadillac CTS is newer by 13 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1997 Ford Mustang. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1997 Ford Mustang would be higher. At 4,600 cc (8 cylinders), 1997 Ford Mustang is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2010 Cadillac CTS weights approximately 820 kg more than 1997 Ford Mustang.
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, 1997 Ford Mustang (678 Nm) has 376 more torque (in Nm) than 2010 Cadillac CTS. (302 Nm). This means 1997 Ford Mustang will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2010 Cadillac CTS.
Compare all specifications:
1997 Ford Mustang | 2010 Cadillac CTS | |
Make | Ford | Cadillac |
Model | Mustang | CTS |
Year Released | 1997 | 2010 |
Body Type | Coupe | Station Wagon |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 4600 cc | 3000 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Horse Power | 0 HP | 270 HP |
Torque | 678 Nm | 302 Nm |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 936 kg | 1756 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4620 mm | 4867 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1830 mm | 1842 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2580 mm | 2880 mm |