2009 Cadillac CTS vs. 1952 Talbot Baby
To start off, 2009 Cadillac CTS is newer by 57 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1952 Talbot Baby. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1952 Talbot Baby would be higher. At 5,664 cc (8 cylinders), 2009 Cadillac CTS is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Cadillac CTS (395 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 287 more horse power than 1952 Talbot Baby. (108 HP @ 4500 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2009 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 1952 Talbot Baby. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2009 Cadillac CTS weights approximately 95 kg more than 1952 Talbot Baby. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
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:
| 2009 Cadillac CTS | 1952 Talbot Baby | |
| Make | Cadillac | Talbot |
| Model | CTS | Baby |
| Year Released | 2009 | 1952 |
| Engine Size | 5664 cc | 2690 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 395 HP | 108 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 4500 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline - Premium | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Vehicle Weight | 1745 kg | 1650 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4870 mm | 5060 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1800 mm | 1780 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1460 mm | 1510 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2890 mm | 3130 mm |
