2003 Cadillac CTS vs. 2000 Mercedes-Benz CLK
To start off, 2003 Cadillac CTS is newer by 3 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2000 Mercedes-Benz CLK. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2000 Mercedes-Benz CLK would be higher. At 5,500 cc (8 cylinders), 2000 Mercedes-Benz CLK is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2000 Mercedes-Benz CLK (367 HP) has 188 more horse power than 2003 Cadillac CTS. (179 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2000 Mercedes-Benz CLK should accelerate faster than 2003 Cadillac CTS. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2003 Cadillac CTS weights approximately 192 kg more than 2000 Mercedes-Benz CLK.
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.
Compare all specifications:
| 2003 Cadillac CTS | 2000 Mercedes-Benz CLK | |
| Make | Cadillac | Mercedes-Benz |
| Model | CTS | CLK |
| Year Released | 2003 | 2000 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Coupe |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2597 cc | 5500 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Horse Power | 179 HP | 367 HP |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1620 kg | 1428 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4840 mm | 4580 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1800 mm | 1730 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1350 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2890 mm | 2780 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 64 L | 88 L |
