2002 Cadillac CTS vs. 2012 BMW 535
To start off, 2012 BMW 535 is newer by 10 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 3,173 cc (6 cylinders), 2002 Cadillac CTS is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2012 BMW 535 weights approximately 307 kg more than 2002 Cadillac CTS.
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.
Compare all specifications:
| 2002 Cadillac CTS | 2012 BMW 535 | |
| Make | Cadillac | BMW |
| Model | CTS | 535 |
| Year Released | 2002 | 2012 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3173 cc | 2979 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 220 HP | 0 HP |
| Engine Bore Size | 87.5 mm | 89.6 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 88 mm | 84 mm |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | 8-speed automatic |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1618 kg | 1925 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4840 mm | 4899 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1800 mm | 1860 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1464 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2900 mm | 2968 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 66 L | 67 L |
