2004 Cadillac CTS vs. 1981 Oldsmobile Cutlass
To start off, 2004 Cadillac CTS is newer by 23 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1981 Oldsmobile Cutlass. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1981 Oldsmobile Cutlass would be higher. At 3,790 cc (6 cylinders), 1981 Oldsmobile Cutlass is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2004 Cadillac CTS weights approximately 300 kg more than 1981 Oldsmobile Cutlass.
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. 1981 Oldsmobile Cutlass has automatic transmission and 2004 Cadillac CTS has manual transmission. 2004 Cadillac CTS will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 1981 Oldsmobile Cutlass will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
2004 Cadillac CTS | 1981 Oldsmobile Cutlass | |
Make | Cadillac | Oldsmobile |
Model | CTS | Cutlass |
Year Released | 2004 | 1981 |
Body Type | Sedan | Coupe |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2597 cc | 3790 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 179 HP | 0 HP |
Fuel Type | Gasoline - Premium | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | Automatic |
Vehicle Weight | 1780 kg | 1480 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4830 mm | 5030 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1800 mm | 1840 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1390 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2950 mm | 2760 mm |