2003 Cadillac CTS vs. 2005 Mitsubishi Colt
To start off, 2005 Mitsubishi Colt is newer by 2 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2003 Cadillac CTS. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2003 Cadillac CTS would be higher.
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, 2005 Mitsubishi Colt, 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 | 2005 Mitsubishi Colt | |
| Make | Cadillac | Mitsubishi |
| Model | CTS | Colt |
| Year Released | 2003 | 2005 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Convertible |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Horse Power | 179 HP | 0 HP |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
