2002 Cadillac CTS vs. 2010 Ford Ecosport
To start off, 2010 Ford Ecosport is newer by 8 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2002 Cadillac CTS. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2002 Cadillac CTS would be higher. At 3,179 cc (6 cylinders), 2002 Cadillac CTS is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2002 Cadillac CTS (210 HP) has 67 more horse power than 2010 Ford Ecosport. (143 HP). In normal driving conditions, 2002 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 2010 Ford Ecosport.
Because 2010 Ford Ecosport is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2002 Cadillac CTS. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2010 Ford Ecosport will offer significantly more control. 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. 2010 Ford Ecosport has automatic transmission and 2002 Cadillac CTS has manual transmission. 2002 Cadillac CTS will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2010 Ford Ecosport will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 2002 Cadillac CTS | 2010 Ford Ecosport | |
| Make | Cadillac | Ford |
| Model | CTS | Ecosport |
| Year Released | 2002 | 2010 |
| Body Type | Sedan | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3179 cc | 2000 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 210 HP | 143 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4840 mm | 4228 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1800 mm | 1980 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1679 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2940 mm | 2490 mm |
