2006 Cadillac CTS vs. 1996 Proton 400
To start off, 2006 Cadillac CTS is newer by 10 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1996 Proton 400. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1996 Proton 400 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 1996 Proton 400. (114 HP @ 6000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2006 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 1996 Proton 400.
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, 1996 Proton 400, 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 376 more torque (in Nm) than 1996 Proton 400. (160 Nm @ 3000 RPM). This means 2006 Cadillac CTS will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1996 Proton 400.
Compare all specifications:
| 2006 Cadillac CTS | 1996 Proton 400 | |
| Make | Cadillac | Proton |
| Model | CTS | 400 |
| Year Released | 2006 | 1996 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 5965 cc | 1834 cc |
| Horse Power | 400 HP | 114 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Torque | 536 Nm | 160 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4400 RPM | 3000 RPM |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Vehicle Length | 4870 mm | 4370 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1800 mm | 1700 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1460 mm | 1390 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2890 mm | 2510 mm |
