2003 Cadillac CTS vs. 1996 Ford Mustang
To start off, 2003 Cadillac CTS is newer by 7 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1996 Ford Mustang. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1996 Ford Mustang would be higher. At 4,601 cc (8 cylinders), 1996 Ford Mustang is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1996 Ford Mustang (350 HP) has 171 more horse power than 2003 Cadillac CTS. (179 HP) In normal driving conditions, 1996 Ford Mustang should accelerate faster than 2003 Cadillac CTS. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2003 Cadillac CTS weights approximately 275 kg more than 1996 Ford Mustang.
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, 1996 Ford Mustang (556 Nm) has 311 more torque (in Nm) than 2003 Cadillac CTS. (245 Nm). This means 1996 Ford Mustang will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2003 Cadillac CTS.
Compare all specifications:
2003 Cadillac CTS | 1996 Ford Mustang | |
Make | Cadillac | Ford |
Model | CTS | Mustang |
Year Released | 2003 | 1996 |
Body Type | Sedan | Coupe |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2597 cc | 4601 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 179 HP | 350 HP |
Torque | 245 Nm | 556 Nm |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1620 kg | 1345 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4840 mm | 4620 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1800 mm | 1830 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1350 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2890 mm | 2580 mm |