2009 Cadillac BLS vs. 1966 DAF Daffodil
To start off, 2009 Cadillac BLS is newer by 43 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1966 DAF Daffodil. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1966 DAF Daffodil would be higher. At 1,910 cc (4 cylinders), 2009 Cadillac BLS is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Cadillac BLS (179 HP @ 4000 RPM) has 153 more horse power than 1966 DAF Daffodil. (26 HP @ 4000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2009 Cadillac BLS should accelerate faster than 1966 DAF Daffodil. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2009 Cadillac BLS weights approximately 934 kg more than 1966 DAF Daffodil. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 1966 DAF Daffodil 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 1966 DAF Daffodil. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2009 Cadillac BLS, 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:
2009 Cadillac BLS | 1966 DAF Daffodil | |
Make | Cadillac | DAF |
Model | BLS | Daffodil |
Year Released | 2009 | 1966 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1910 cc | 746 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 2 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 179 HP | 26 HP |
Engine RPM | 4000 RPM | 4000 RPM |
Fuel Type | Diesel | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Front | Rear |
Vehicle Weight | 1600 kg | 666 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4720 mm | 3620 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1760 mm | 1450 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1550 mm | 1380 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2680 mm | 2060 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 58 L | 33 L |