2003 Cadillac CTS vs. 2000 Holden HRT
To start off, 2003 Cadillac CTS is newer by 3 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2000 Holden HRT. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2000 Holden HRT would be higher. At 5,000 cc (8 cylinders), 2000 Holden HRT is equipped with a bigger engine.
Because 2003 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 2003 Cadillac CTS. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2000 Holden HRT, 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. Let's talk about torque, 2000 Holden HRT (815 Nm) has 570 more torque (in Nm) than 2003 Cadillac CTS. (245 Nm). This means 2000 Holden HRT will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2003 Cadillac CTS.
Compare all specifications:
| 2003 Cadillac CTS | 2000 Holden HRT | |
| Make | Cadillac | Holden |
| Model | CTS | HRT |
| Year Released | 2003 | 2000 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2597 cc | 5000 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Horse Power | 179 HP | 0 HP |
| Torque | 245 Nm | 815 Nm |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
