2009 Cadillac STS vs. 1956 Talbot T 26
To start off, 2009 Cadillac STS is newer by 53 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1956 Talbot T 26. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1956 Talbot T 26 would be higher. At 4,482 cc (6 cylinders), 1956 Talbot T 26 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Cadillac STS (302 HP @ 6300 RPM) has 105 more horse power than 1956 Talbot T 26. (197 HP @ 4300 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2009 Cadillac STS should accelerate faster than 1956 Talbot T 26. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1956 Talbot T 26 weights approximately 50 kg more than 2009 Cadillac STS.
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. 2009 Cadillac STS has automatic transmission and 1956 Talbot T 26 has manual transmission. 1956 Talbot T 26 will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2009 Cadillac STS will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 2009 Cadillac STS | 1956 Talbot T 26 | |
| Make | Cadillac | Talbot |
| Model | STS | T 26 |
| Year Released | 2009 | 1956 |
| Engine Size | 3600 cc | 4482 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 302 HP | 197 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6300 RPM | 4300 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Manual |
| Vehicle Weight | 1560 kg | 1610 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5000 mm | 4860 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1850 mm | 1890 mm |
