2004 Alfa Romeo 156 vs. 1963 Cadillac Eldorado
To start off, 2004 Alfa Romeo 156 is newer by 41 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1963 Cadillac Eldorado. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1963 Cadillac Eldorado would be higher. At 6,390 cc (8 cylinders), 1963 Cadillac Eldorado is equipped with a bigger engine.
Because 1963 Cadillac Eldorado 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 1963 Cadillac Eldorado. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2004 Alfa Romeo 156, 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:
| 2004 Alfa Romeo 156 | 1963 Cadillac Eldorado | |
| Make | Alfa Romeo | Cadillac |
| Model | 156 | Eldorado |
| Year Released | 2004 | 1963 |
| Body Type | Station Wagon | Coupe |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1598 cc | 6390 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 113 HP | 0 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4450 mm | 5670 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1440 mm | 1370 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2600 mm | 3300 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 63 L | 75 L |
