2006 Cadillac CTS vs. 1953 Talbot Baby
To start off, 2006 Cadillac CTS is newer by 53 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1953 Talbot Baby. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1953 Talbot Baby would be higher. At 2,801 cc (6 cylinders), 2006 Cadillac CTS is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Cadillac CTS (210 HP @ 6500 RPM) has 102 more horse power than 1953 Talbot Baby. (108 HP @ 4500 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2006 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 1953 Talbot Baby. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1953 Talbot Baby weights approximately 38 kg more than 2006 Cadillac CTS.
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 | 1953 Talbot Baby | |
| Make | Cadillac | Talbot |
| Model | CTS | Baby |
| Year Released | 2006 | 1953 |
| Engine Size | 2801 cc | 2690 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 210 HP | 108 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6500 RPM | 4500 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Vehicle Weight | 1618 kg | 1656 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4840 mm | 5060 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1800 mm | 1780 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1510 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2890 mm | 3130 mm |
