2004 Cadillac CTS vs. 1942 Cadillac 60
To start off, 2004 Cadillac CTS is newer by 62 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1942 Cadillac 60. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1942 Cadillac 60 would be higher. At 5,671 cc (8 cylinders), 1942 Cadillac 60 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Cadillac CTS (179 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 31 more horse power than 1942 Cadillac 60. (148 HP @ 3400 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2004 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 1942 Cadillac 60. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1942 Cadillac 60 weights approximately 40 kg more than 2004 Cadillac CTS.
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:
| 2004 Cadillac CTS | 1942 Cadillac 60 | |
| Make | Cadillac | Cadillac |
| Model | CTS | 60 |
| Year Released | 2004 | 1942 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2597 cc | 5671 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 179 HP | 148 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 3400 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline - Premium | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 1780 kg | 1820 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4830 mm | 5450 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1800 mm | 1920 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2950 mm | 3230 mm |
