2002 Cadillac CTS vs. 2012 Volvo XC60
To start off, 2012 Volvo XC60 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 Volvo XC60 weights approximately 303 kg more than 2002 Cadillac CTS.
Because 2012 Volvo XC60 is all wheel drive (AWD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2002 Cadillac CTS. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2012 Volvo XC60 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.
Compare all specifications:
| 2002 Cadillac CTS | 2012 Volvo XC60 | |
| Make | Cadillac | Volvo |
| Model | CTS | XC60 |
| Year Released | 2002 | 2012 |
| Body Type | Sedan | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3173 cc | 2000 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 5 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 220 HP | 0 HP |
| Drive Type | Rear | AWD |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | 6-speed shiftable automatic |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1618 kg | 1921 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4840 mm | 4628 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1800 mm | 1890 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1712 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2900 mm | 2748 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 66 L | 70 L |
