2002 BMW Z4 vs. 2009 Cadillac SRX
To start off, 2009 Cadillac SRX is newer by 7 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2002 BMW Z4. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2002 BMW Z4 would be higher. At 3,564 cc (6 cylinders), 2009 Cadillac SRX is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Cadillac SRX (252 HP @ 6500 RPM) has 25 more horse power than 2002 BMW Z4. (227 HP @ 5900 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Cadillac SRX should accelerate faster than 2002 BMW Z4.
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, 2002 BMW Z4 (300 Nm @ 3500 RPM) has 46 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Cadillac SRX. (254 Nm @ 2800 RPM). This means 2002 BMW Z4 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Cadillac SRX.
Compare all specifications:
| 2002 BMW Z4 | 2009 Cadillac SRX | |
| Make | BMW | Cadillac |
| Model | Z4 | SRX |
| Year Released | 2002 | 2009 |
| Body Type | Convertible | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2996 cc | 3564 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 227 HP | 252 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5900 RPM | 6500 RPM |
| Torque | 300 Nm | 254 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3500 RPM | 2800 RPM |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 10.2:1 | 10.2:1 |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Width | 1790 mm | 1850 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 7.3 L/100km | 10.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 13.5 L/100km | 15.7 L/100km |
