2003 Cadillac CTS vs. 1954 Maserati A6G
To start off, 2003 Cadillac CTS is newer by 49 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1954 Maserati A6G. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1954 Maserati A6G would be higher. At 3,563 cc (6 cylinders), 2003 Cadillac CTS is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2003 Cadillac CTS (252 HP @ 6200 RPM) has 84 more horse power than 1954 Maserati A6G. (168 HP @ 7500 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2003 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 1954 Maserati A6G. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2003 Cadillac CTS weights approximately 925 kg more than 1954 Maserati A6G. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
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:
| 2003 Cadillac CTS | 1954 Maserati A6G | |
| Make | Cadillac | Maserati |
| Model | CTS | A6G |
| Year Released | 2003 | 1954 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Coupe |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3563 cc | 1985 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 252 HP | 168 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6200 RPM | 7500 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Vehicle Weight | 1675 kg | 750 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4840 mm | 3850 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1800 mm | 1540 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 870 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2890 mm | 2320 mm |
