2003 Fiat Idea vs. 2009 Cadillac CTS
To start off, 2009 Cadillac CTS is newer by 6 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2003 Fiat Idea. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2003 Fiat Idea would be higher. At 3,564 cc (6 cylinders), 2009 Cadillac CTS is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Cadillac CTS (307 HP @ 6400 RPM) has 229 more horse power than 2003 Fiat Idea. (78 HP @ 5000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 2003 Fiat Idea. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2009 Cadillac CTS weights approximately 630 kg more than 2003 Fiat Idea. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 2009 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 2009 Cadillac CTS. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2003 Fiat Idea, 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, 2009 Cadillac CTS (374 Nm @ 5200 RPM) has 260 more torque (in Nm) than 2003 Fiat Idea. (114 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 2009 Cadillac CTS will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2003 Fiat Idea. 2009 Cadillac CTS has automatic transmission and 2003 Fiat Idea has manual transmission. 2003 Fiat Idea will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2009 Cadillac CTS will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 2003 Fiat Idea | 2009 Cadillac CTS | |
| Make | Fiat | Cadillac |
| Model | Idea | CTS |
| Year Released | 2003 | 2009 |
| Body Type | Hatchback | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1242 cc | 3564 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 78 HP | 307 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5000 RPM | 6400 RPM |
| Torque | 114 Nm | 374 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4000 RPM | 5200 RPM |
| Engine Bore Size | 70.8 mm | 94 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 78.9 mm | 85.6 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 10.6:1 | 9.0:1 |
| Top Speed | 163 km/hour | 249 km/hour |
| Acceleration 0-100mph | 13.5 seconds | 6.6 seconds |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1158 kg | 1788 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 3940 mm | 4870 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1700 mm | 1850 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1670 mm | 1470 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2550 mm | 2890 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 6.5 L/100km | 11.1 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 47 L | 68 L |
