2004 Cadillac CTS vs. 1986 Mazda 929
To start off, 2004 Cadillac CTS is newer by 18 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1986 Mazda 929. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1986 Mazda 929 would be higher. At 5,665 cc (8 cylinders), 2004 Cadillac CTS is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Cadillac CTS (396 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 251 more horse power than 1986 Mazda 929. (145 HP @ 5000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2004 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 1986 Mazda 929.
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 (536 Nm @ 4800 RPM) has 306 more torque (in Nm) than 1986 Mazda 929. (230 Nm @ 2500 RPM). This means 2004 Cadillac CTS will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1986 Mazda 929.
Compare all specifications:
2004 Cadillac CTS | 1986 Mazda 929 | |
Make | Cadillac | Mazda |
Model | CTS | 929 |
Year Released | 2004 | 1986 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 5665 cc | 1997 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Horse Power | 396 HP | 145 HP |
Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 5000 RPM |
Torque | 536 Nm | 230 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4800 RPM | 2500 RPM |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4870 mm | 4930 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1800 mm | 1730 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1460 mm | 1390 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2890 mm | 2720 mm |