2004 Cadillac CTS vs. 1972 Rover P5B
To start off, 2004 Cadillac CTS is newer by 32 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1972 Rover P5B. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1972 Rover P5B would be higher. At 3,528 cc (8 cylinders), 1972 Rover P5B is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Cadillac CTS (220 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 62 more horse power than 1972 Rover P5B. (158 HP @ 5200 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2004 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 1972 Rover P5B. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2004 Cadillac CTS weights approximately 2 kg more than 1972 Rover P5B. 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. Let's talk about torque, 2004 Cadillac CTS (298 Nm) has 3 more torque (in Nm) than 1972 Rover P5B. (295 Nm). This means 2004 Cadillac CTS will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1972 Rover P5B.
Compare all specifications:
2004 Cadillac CTS | 1972 Rover P5B | |
Make | Cadillac | Rover |
Model | CTS | P5B |
Year Released | 2004 | 1972 |
Engine Size | 3179 cc | 3528 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 220 HP | 158 HP |
Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 5200 RPM |
Torque | 298 Nm | 295 Nm |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Vehicle Weight | 1592 kg | 1590 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4840 mm | 4750 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1800 mm | 1790 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1550 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2890 mm | 2820 mm |