1996 Mitsubishi Carisma vs. 2007 Cadillac CTS

To start off, 2007 Cadillac CTS is newer by 11 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1996 Mitsubishi Carisma. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1996 Mitsubishi Carisma would be higher. At 2,792 cc (6 cylinders), 2007 Cadillac CTS is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2007 Cadillac CTS (212 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 123 more horse power than 1996 Mitsubishi Carisma. (89 HP @ 4250 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2007 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 1996 Mitsubishi Carisma.

Because 2007 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 2007 Cadillac CTS. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1996 Mitsubishi Carisma, 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. Let's talk about torque, 2007 Cadillac CTS (263 Nm @ 3300 RPM) has 87 more torque (in Nm) than 1996 Mitsubishi Carisma. (176 Nm @ 2250 RPM). This means 2007 Cadillac CTS will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1996 Mitsubishi Carisma. 2007 Cadillac CTS has automatic transmission and 1996 Mitsubishi Carisma has manual transmission. 1996 Mitsubishi Carisma will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2007 Cadillac CTS will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.

Compare all specifications: