2003 Cadillac CTS vs. 2012 BMW 640
To start off, 2012 BMW 640 is newer by 9 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. At 2,979 cc (6 cylinders), 2012 BMW 640 is equipped with a bigger engine.
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. 2012 BMW 640 has automatic transmission and 2003 Cadillac CTS has manual transmission. 2003 Cadillac CTS will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2012 BMW 640 will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 2003 Cadillac CTS | 2012 BMW 640 | |
| Make | Cadillac | BMW |
| Model | CTS | 640 |
| Year Released | 2003 | 2012 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Coupe |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2597 cc | 2979 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 179 HP | 0 HP |
| Engine Bore Size | 83.3 mm | 89.6 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 79.6 mm | 84 mm |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | 8-speed shiftable automatic |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4840 mm | 4894 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1800 mm | 1894 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1369 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2890 mm | 2855 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 64 L | 70 L |
