1998 Bristol Blenheim vs. 2003 Cadillac CTS
To start off, 2003 Cadillac CTS is newer by 5 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1998 Bristol Blenheim. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1998 Bristol Blenheim would be higher. At 5,898 cc (8 cylinders), 1998 Bristol Blenheim is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1998 Bristol Blenheim weights approximately 87 kg more than 2003 Cadillac CTS.
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.
Compare all specifications:
| 1998 Bristol Blenheim | 2003 Cadillac CTS | |
| Make | Bristol | Cadillac |
| Model | Blenheim | CTS |
| Year Released | 1998 | 2003 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 5898 cc | 3563 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 252 HP |
| Engine Bore Size | 101.6 mm | 94 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 90.9 mm | 86 mm |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1762 kg | 1675 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4870 mm | 4840 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1750 mm | 1800 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1440 mm | 1450 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2900 mm | 2890 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 82 L | 64 L |
