2002 Bristol Blenheim vs. 2009 Cadillac BLS
To start off, 2009 Cadillac BLS is newer by 7 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2002 Bristol Blenheim. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2002 Bristol Blenheim would be higher. At 5,900 cc (8 cylinders), 2002 Bristol Blenheim is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2009 Cadillac BLS weights approximately 165 kg more than 2002 Bristol Blenheim.
Because 2002 Bristol Blenheim 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 2002 Bristol Blenheim. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2009 Cadillac BLS, 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:
| 2002 Bristol Blenheim | 2009 Cadillac BLS | |
| Make | Bristol | Cadillac |
| Model | Blenheim | BLS |
| Year Released | 2002 | 2009 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 5900 cc | 2792 cc |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 247 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline - Premium |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1395 kg | 1560 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4680 mm | 4690 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1760 mm | 1460 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1120 mm | 1770 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2900 mm | 2680 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 105 L | 58 L |
