2006 Cadillac CTS vs. 1971 NSU Ro 80
To start off, 2006 Cadillac CTS is newer by 35 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1971 NSU Ro 80. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1971 NSU Ro 80 would be higher. At 5,965 cc, 2006 Cadillac CTS is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Cadillac CTS (400 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 286 more horse power than 1971 NSU Ro 80. (114 HP @ 5500 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2006 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 1971 NSU Ro 80.
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, 1971 NSU Ro 80, 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. Let's talk about torque, 2006 Cadillac CTS (536 Nm @ 4400 RPM) has 374 more torque (in Nm) than 1971 NSU Ro 80. (162 Nm @ 4500 RPM). This means 2006 Cadillac CTS will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1971 NSU Ro 80.
Compare all specifications:
| 2006 Cadillac CTS | 1971 NSU Ro 80 | |
| Make | Cadillac | NSU |
| Model | CTS | Ro 80 |
| Year Released | 2006 | 1971 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 5965 cc | 2390 cc |
| Horse Power | 400 HP | 114 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 5500 RPM |
| Torque | 536 Nm | 162 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4400 RPM | 4500 RPM |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4870 mm | 4790 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1800 mm | 1770 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1460 mm | 1420 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2890 mm | 2860 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 64 L | 37 L |
