2006 Cadillac CTS vs. 1964 Lancia Fulvia
To start off, 2006 Cadillac CTS is newer by 42 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1964 Lancia Fulvia. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1964 Lancia Fulvia would be higher. At 3,556 cc (6 cylinders), 2006 Cadillac CTS is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2006 Cadillac CTS weights approximately 632 kg more than 1964 Lancia Fulvia.
Because 2006 Cadillac CTS is rear wheel drive (RWD), it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, it will be much easier to do with 2006 Cadillac CTS. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1964 Lancia Fulvia, being front wheel drive (FWD), will offer much better control with better grip. 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 | 1964 Lancia Fulvia | |
Make | Cadillac | Lancia |
Model | CTS | Fulvia |
Year Released | 2006 | 1964 |
Body Type | Sedan | Coupe |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3556 cc | 1242 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 255 HP | 0 HP |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1592 kg | 960 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4840 mm | 3990 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1800 mm | 1570 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1330 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2890 mm | 2340 mm |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 11.8 L/100km | 10.1 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 64 L | 42 L |