2003 BMW M3 vs. 2009 Cadillac CTS
To start off, 2009 Cadillac CTS is newer by 6 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2003 BMW M3. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2003 BMW M3 would be higher. At 3,564 cc (6 cylinders), 2009 Cadillac CTS is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2003 BMW M3 (342 HP @ 7900 RPM) has 83 more horse power than 2009 Cadillac CTS. (259 HP @ 6200 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2003 BMW M3 should accelerate faster than 2009 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. Let's talk about torque, 2003 BMW M3 (350 Nm @ 4900 RPM) has 97 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Cadillac CTS. (253 Nm @ 3100 RPM). This means 2003 BMW M3 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Cadillac CTS.
Compare all specifications:
| 2003 BMW M3 | 2009 Cadillac CTS | |
| Make | BMW | Cadillac |
| Model | M3 | CTS |
| Year Released | 2003 | 2009 |
| Body Type | Coupe | Station Wagon |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3168 cc | 3564 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 342 HP | 259 HP |
| Engine RPM | 7900 RPM | 6200 RPM |
| Torque | 350 Nm | 253 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4900 RPM | 3100 RPM |
| Engine Bore Size | 87 mm | 94 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 91 mm | 85 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 11.5:1 | 10.2:1 |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
