2006 Cadillac CTS vs. 1949 Volvo PV 60
To start off, 2006 Cadillac CTS is newer by 57 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1949 Volvo PV 60. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1949 Volvo PV 60 would be higher. At 3,670 cc (6 cylinders), 1949 Volvo PV 60 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Cadillac CTS (252 HP @ 6200 RPM) has 167 more horse power than 1949 Volvo PV 60. (85 HP @ 3400 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2006 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 1949 Volvo PV 60. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2006 Cadillac CTS weights approximately 116 kg more than 1949 Volvo PV 60. 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:
| 2006 Cadillac CTS | 1949 Volvo PV 60 | |
| Make | Cadillac | Volvo |
| Model | CTS | PV 60 |
| Year Released | 2006 | 1949 |
| Engine Size | 3564 cc | 3670 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 252 HP | 85 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6200 RPM | 3400 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline - Premium | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Vehicle Weight | 1746 kg | 1630 kg |
| Wheelbase Size | 2890 mm | 2850 mm |
