2000 Cadillac XLR vs. 1964 Lotus Elan
To start off, 2000 Cadillac XLR is newer by 36 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1964 Lotus Elan. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1964 Lotus Elan would be higher. At 4,565 cc (8 cylinders), 2000 Cadillac XLR is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2000 Cadillac XLR (301 HP @ 6400 RPM) has 197 more horse power than 1964 Lotus Elan. (104 HP @ 6250 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2000 Cadillac XLR should accelerate faster than 1964 Lotus Elan.
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. 2000 Cadillac XLR has automatic transmission and 1964 Lotus Elan has manual transmission. 1964 Lotus Elan will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2000 Cadillac XLR will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 2000 Cadillac XLR | 1964 Lotus Elan | |
| Make | Cadillac | Lotus |
| Model | XLR | Elan |
| Year Released | 2000 | 1964 |
| Body Type | Convertible | Convertible |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4565 cc | 1558 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 301 HP | 104 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6400 RPM | 6250 RPM |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 2 seats | 2 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4520 mm | 3700 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1840 mm | 1430 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1290 mm | 1150 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 68 L | 45 L |
