2000 BMW Z9 vs. 2009 Cadillac CTS
To start off, 2009 Cadillac CTS is newer by 9 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2000 BMW Z9. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2000 BMW Z9 would be higher. At 5,664 cc (8 cylinders), 2009 Cadillac CTS is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Cadillac CTS (395 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 113 more horse power than 2000 BMW Z9. (282 HP @ 5400 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 2000 BMW Z9.
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 CTS (536 Nm @ 4800 RPM) has 96 more torque (in Nm) than 2000 BMW Z9. (440 Nm @ 3600 RPM). This means 2009 Cadillac CTS will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2000 BMW Z9.
Compare all specifications:
| 2000 BMW Z9 | 2009 Cadillac CTS | |
| Make | BMW | Cadillac |
| Model | Z9 | CTS |
| Year Released | 2000 | 2009 |
| Body Type | Convertible | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4398 cc | 5664 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 282 HP | 395 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5400 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Torque | 440 Nm | 536 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3600 RPM | 4800 RPM |
| Engine Bore Size | 92 mm | 99 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 82.7 mm | 92 mm |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline - Premium |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Length | 5010 mm | 4870 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 2010 mm | 1800 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1360 mm | 1460 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3110 mm | 2890 mm |
