2001 Mitsubishi SUW vs. 2010 Cadillac CTS
To start off, 2010 Cadillac CTS is newer by 9 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2001 Mitsubishi SUW. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2001 Mitsubishi SUW would be higher. At 3,600 cc (6 cylinders), 2010 Cadillac CTS is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2010 Cadillac CTS (304 HP @ 6400 RPM) has 184 more horse power than 2001 Mitsubishi SUW. (120 HP @ 4000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 2001 Mitsubishi SUW. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2001 Mitsubishi SUW weights approximately 148 kg more than 2010 Cadillac CTS.
Because 2010 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 2010 Cadillac CTS. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2001 Mitsubishi SUW, 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, 2010 Cadillac CTS (370 Nm) has 130 more torque (in Nm) than 2001 Mitsubishi SUW. (240 Nm). This means 2010 Cadillac CTS will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2001 Mitsubishi SUW.
Compare all specifications:
| 2001 Mitsubishi SUW | 2010 Cadillac CTS | |
| Make | Mitsubishi | Cadillac |
| Model | SUW | CTS |
| Year Released | 2001 | 2010 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1097 cc | 3600 cc |
| Horse Power | 120 HP | 304 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4000 RPM | 6400 RPM |
| Torque | 240 Nm | 370 Nm |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
| Vehicle Weight | 1905 kg | 1757 kg |
| Wheelbase Size | 2630 mm | 2880 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 71 L | 68 L |
