2009 Ford Maverick vs. 1981 Oldsmobile Cutlass

To start off, 2009 Ford Maverick is newer by 28 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1981 Oldsmobile Cutlass. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1981 Oldsmobile Cutlass would be higher. At 3,790 cc (6 cylinders), 1981 Oldsmobile Cutlass is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2009 Ford Maverick weights approximately 125 kg more than 1981 Oldsmobile Cutlass.

Because 2009 Ford Maverick is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1981 Oldsmobile Cutlass. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2009 Ford Maverick will offer significantly more control. 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 Ford Maverick 1981 Oldsmobile Cutlass
Make Ford Oldsmobile
Model Maverick Cutlass
Year Released 2009 1981
Engine Position Front Front
Engine Size 2967 cc 3790 cc
Engine Cylinders 6 cylinders 6 cylinders
Engine Type V in-line
Horse Power 194 HP 0 HP
Fuel Type Gasoline - Premium Gasoline
Drive Type 4WD Rear
Transmission Type Automatic Automatic
Vehicle Weight 1605 kg 1480 kg
Vehicle Length 4420 mm 5030 mm
Vehicle Width 1830 mm 1840 mm
Vehicle Height 1780 mm 1390 mm
Wheelbase Size 2630 mm 2760 mm


 

More Comparisons

Resources

Replacing Your Front Disc Brakes Made Simple: The Definitive DIY Guide
Replace the front disc brakes of your vehicle and save money on labour cost. Read this guide to learn how. [read more]
What to look for when buying a used/second hand car.
Diligence through every step of the buying process will help you find a reliable used car and avoid any unpleasant surprises. [read more]
Step-by-Step Guide on How to Perform an Oil Change on Your Car
One of the most effective ways of saving money on car maintenance is to change the oil yourself. [read more]