1999 Mercury Sable vs. 2013 Cadillac CTS
To start off, 2013 Cadillac CTS is newer by 14 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1999 Mercury Sable. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1999 Mercury Sable would be higher. At 3,600 cc (6 cylinders), 2013 Cadillac CTS is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2013 Cadillac CTS weights approximately 176 kg more than 1999 Mercury Sable.
Because 2013 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 2013 Cadillac CTS. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1999 Mercury Sable, 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:
| 1999 Mercury Sable | 2013 Cadillac CTS | |
| Make | Mercury | Cadillac |
| Model | Sable | CTS |
| Year Released | 1999 | 2013 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2986 cc | 3600 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 314 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | 6-speed automatic |
| Number of Seats | 6 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1602 kg | 1778 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5100 mm | 4859 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1860 mm | 1842 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1420 mm | 1473 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2760 mm | 2880 mm |
