2004 Cadillac CTS vs. 1958 Ford 12 M
To start off, 2004 Cadillac CTS is newer by 46 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1958 Ford 12 M. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1958 Ford 12 M would be higher. At 2,597 cc (6 cylinders), 2004 Cadillac CTS is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Cadillac CTS (179 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 126 more horse power than 1958 Ford 12 M. (53 HP @ 4250 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2004 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 1958 Ford 12 M. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2004 Cadillac CTS weights approximately 885 kg more than 1958 Ford 12 M. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
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 | 1958 Ford 12 M | |
Make | Cadillac | Ford |
Model | CTS | 12 M |
Year Released | 2004 | 1958 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2597 cc | 1498 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
Horse Power | 179 HP | 53 HP |
Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 4250 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 | 895 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4830 mm | 4070 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1800 mm | 1590 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1560 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2950 mm | 2500 mm |