2002 BMW M3 vs. 2011 Cadillac CTS-V
To start off, 2011 Cadillac CTS-V is newer by 9 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2002 BMW M3. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2002 BMW M3 would be higher. At 6,200 cc (8 cylinders), 2011 Cadillac CTS-V is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2011 Cadillac CTS-V (556 HP @ 6100 RPM) has 112 more horse power than 2002 BMW M3. (444 HP @ 7400 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2011 Cadillac CTS-V should accelerate faster than 2002 BMW M3. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2011 Cadillac CTS-V weights approximately 815 kg more than 2002 BMW M3. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
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, 2011 Cadillac CTS-V (746 Nm) has 266 more torque (in Nm) than 2002 BMW M3. (480 Nm). This means 2011 Cadillac CTS-V will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2002 BMW M3.
Compare all specifications:
2002 BMW M3 | 2011 Cadillac CTS-V | |
Make | BMW | Cadillac |
Model | M3 | CTS-V |
Year Released | 2002 | 2011 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3997 cc | 6200 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
Horse Power | 444 HP | 556 HP |
Engine RPM | 7400 RPM | 6100 RPM |
Torque | 480 Nm | 746 Nm |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Vehicle Weight | 1100 kg | 1915 kg |
Wheelbase Size | 2890 mm | 2880 mm |