2003 Cadillac CTS-V vs. 2006 Ford Ecosport
To start off, 2006 Ford Ecosport is newer by 3 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2003 Cadillac CTS-V. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2003 Cadillac CTS-V would be higher. At 5,666 cc (8 cylinders), 2003 Cadillac CTS-V is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2003 Cadillac CTS-V (400 HP) has 333 more horse power than 2006 Ford Ecosport. (67 HP). In normal driving conditions, 2003 Cadillac CTS-V should accelerate faster than 2006 Ford Ecosport.
Because 2003 Cadillac CTS-V 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 2003 Cadillac CTS-V. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2006 Ford Ecosport, 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:
2003 Cadillac CTS-V | 2006 Ford Ecosport | |
Make | Cadillac | Ford |
Model | CTS-V | Ecosport |
Year Released | 2003 | 2006 |
Body Type | Sedan | SUV |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 5666 cc | 1400 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 400 HP | 67 HP |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4870 mm | 4228 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1800 mm | 1980 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1460 mm | 1679 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2890 mm | 2490 mm |