2002 Cadillac CTS vs. 1963 Triumph Herald
To start off, 2002 Cadillac CTS is newer by 39 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1963 Triumph Herald. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1963 Triumph Herald would be higher. At 3,173 cc (6 cylinders), 2002 Cadillac CTS is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2002 Cadillac CTS (220 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 182 more horse power than 1963 Triumph Herald. (38 HP @ 4500 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2002 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 1963 Triumph Herald. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2002 Cadillac CTS weights approximately 838 kg more than 1963 Triumph Herald. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Let's talk about torque, 2002 Cadillac CTS (296 Nm @ 3400 RPM) has 213 more torque (in Nm) than 1963 Triumph Herald. (83 Nm @ 2250 RPM). This means 2002 Cadillac CTS will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1963 Triumph Herald.
Compare all specifications:
| 2002 Cadillac CTS | 1963 Triumph Herald | |
| Make | Cadillac | Triumph |
| Model | CTS | Herald |
| Year Released | 2002 | 1963 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3173 cc | 1147 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 220 HP | 38 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 4500 RPM |
| Torque | 296 Nm | 83 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3400 RPM | 2250 RPM |
| Engine Bore Size | 87.5 mm | 69.3 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 88 mm | 76 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 10.0:1 | 9.0:1 |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1618 kg | 780 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4840 mm | 3890 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1800 mm | 1530 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1510 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2900 mm | 2320 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 66 L | 29 L |
