1976 Audi 50 vs. 2004 Cadillac CTS
To start off, 2004 Cadillac CTS is newer by 28 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1976 Audi 50. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1976 Audi 50 would be higher. At 5,665 cc (8 cylinders), 2004 Cadillac CTS is equipped with a bigger engine.
Because 2004 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 2004 Cadillac CTS. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1976 Audi 50, 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:
1976 Audi 50 | 2004 Cadillac CTS | |
Make | Audi | Cadillac |
Model | 50 | CTS |
Year Released | 1976 | 2004 |
Body Type | Hatchback | Sedan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 771 cc | 5665 cc |
Horse Power | 0 HP | 396 HP |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline - Premium |
Drive Type | Front | Rear |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 3 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Length | 3510 mm | 4870 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1570 mm | 1800 mm |