2003 Cadillac CTS vs. 1974 Volvo 140
To start off, 2003 Cadillac CTS is newer by 29 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1974 Volvo 140. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1974 Volvo 140 would be higher. At 2,597 cc (6 cylinders), 2003 Cadillac CTS is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2003 Cadillac CTS (179 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 98 more horse power than 1974 Volvo 140. (81 HP @ 4700 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2003 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 1974 Volvo 140.
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. Let's talk about torque, 2003 Cadillac CTS (245 Nm @ 3400 RPM) has 88 more torque (in Nm) than 1974 Volvo 140. (157 Nm @ 2300 RPM). This means 2003 Cadillac CTS will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1974 Volvo 140.
Compare all specifications:
| 2003 Cadillac CTS | 1974 Volvo 140 | |
| Make | Cadillac | Volvo |
| Model | CTS | 140 |
| Year Released | 2003 | 1974 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2597 cc | 1986 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 179 HP | 81 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 4700 RPM |
| Torque | 245 Nm | 157 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3400 RPM | 2300 RPM |
| Engine Bore Size | 83.3 mm | 88.9 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 79.6 mm | 80 mm |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Width | 1800 mm | 1720 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1450 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2890 mm | 2620 mm |
