2003 Cadillac CTS vs. 1968 Mercury Cougar
To start off, 2003 Cadillac CTS is newer by 35 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1968 Mercury Cougar. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1968 Mercury Cougar would be higher. At 4,942 cc (8 cylinders), 1968 Mercury Cougar is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2003 Cadillac CTS (252 HP @ 6200 RPM) has 115 more horse power than 1968 Mercury Cougar. (137 HP @ 4600 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2003 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 1968 Mercury Cougar. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2003 Cadillac CTS weights approximately 275 kg more than 1968 Mercury Cougar. 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 | 1968 Mercury Cougar | |
| Make | Cadillac | Mercury |
| Model | CTS | Cougar |
| Year Released | 2003 | 1968 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Coupe |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3563 cc | 4942 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 252 HP | 137 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6200 RPM | 4600 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1675 kg | 1400 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4840 mm | 4990 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1800 mm | 1890 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1320 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2890 mm | 2830 mm |
