2003 Cadillac CTS vs. 1986 Ford Orion
To start off, 2003 Cadillac CTS is newer by 17 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1986 Ford Orion. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1986 Ford Orion would be higher. At 3,563 cc (6 cylinders), 2003 Cadillac CTS is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2003 Cadillac CTS weights approximately 775 kg more than 1986 Ford Orion.
Because 2003 Cadillac CTS 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 2003 Cadillac CTS. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1986 Ford Orion, 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:
2003 Cadillac CTS | 1986 Ford Orion | |
Make | Cadillac | Ford |
Model | CTS | Orion |
Year Released | 2003 | 1986 |
Body Type | Sedan | Sedan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3563 cc | 1297 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
Horse Power | 252 HP | 0 HP |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1675 kg | 900 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4840 mm | 4230 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1800 mm | 1650 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1350 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2890 mm | 2410 mm |