2002 Mitsubishi eK vs. 2006 Cadillac CTS
To start off, 2006 Cadillac CTS is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2002 Mitsubishi eK. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2002 Mitsubishi eK would be higher. At 3,173 cc (6 cylinders), 2006 Cadillac CTS is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2006 Cadillac CTS weights approximately 1000 kg more than 2002 Mitsubishi eK.
Because 2006 Cadillac CTS is rear wheel drive (RWD), it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, it will be much easier to do with 2006 Cadillac CTS. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2002 Mitsubishi eK, being front wheel drive (FWD), will offer much better control with better grip. 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 Mitsubishi eK | 2006 Cadillac CTS | |
| Make | Mitsubishi | Cadillac |
| Model | eK | CTS |
| Year Released | 2002 | 2006 |
| Body Type | Hatchback | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 657 cc | 3173 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 3 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 215 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline - Premium |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 790 kg | 1790 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 3400 mm | 4830 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1480 mm | 1800 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1560 mm | 1450 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2350 mm | 2890 mm |
