1996 BMW M3 vs. 2009 Cadillac STS-V
To start off, 2009 Cadillac STS-V is newer by 13 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1996 BMW M3. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1996 BMW M3 would be higher. At 4,376 cc (8 cylinders), 2009 Cadillac STS-V is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Cadillac STS-V (469 HP @ 6400 RPM) has 141 more horse power than 1996 BMW M3. (328 HP @ 7400 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Cadillac STS-V should accelerate faster than 1996 BMW M3.
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. Let's talk about torque, 2009 Cadillac STS-V (595 Nm @ 3900 RPM) has 245 more torque (in Nm) than 1996 BMW M3. (350 Nm @ 3250 RPM). This means 2009 Cadillac STS-V will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1996 BMW M3.
Compare all specifications:
| 1996 BMW M3 | 2009 Cadillac STS-V | |
| Make | BMW | Cadillac |
| Model | M3 | STS-V |
| Year Released | 1996 | 2009 |
| Body Type | Convertible | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3169 cc | 4376 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 328 HP | 469 HP |
| Engine RPM | 7400 RPM | 6400 RPM |
| Torque | 350 Nm | 595 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3250 RPM | 3900 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4440 mm | 5030 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1790 mm | 1850 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1340 mm | 1480 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2720 mm | 2960 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 63 L | 64 L |
