2004 BMW 645 vs. 2012 Cadillac CTS
To start off, 2012 Cadillac CTS is newer by 8 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 BMW 645. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 BMW 645 would be higher. At 4,392 cc (8 cylinders), 2004 BMW 645 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 BMW 645 (322 HP @ 7400 RPM) has 52 more horse power than 2012 Cadillac CTS. (270 HP @ 7000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2004 BMW 645 should accelerate faster than 2012 Cadillac CTS. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2012 Cadillac CTS weights approximately 33 kg more than 2004 BMW 645.
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. Let's talk about torque, 2004 BMW 645 (447 Nm) has 145 more torque (in Nm) than 2012 Cadillac CTS. (302 Nm). This means 2004 BMW 645 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2012 Cadillac CTS.
Compare all specifications:
| 2004 BMW 645 | 2012 Cadillac CTS | |
| Make | BMW | Cadillac |
| Model | 645 | CTS |
| Year Released | 2004 | 2012 |
| Body Type | Coupe | Station Wagon |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4392 cc | 3000 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 322 HP | 270 HP |
| Engine RPM | 7400 RPM | 7000 RPM |
| Torque | 447 Nm | 302 Nm |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1715 kg | 1748 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4840 mm | 4877 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1860 mm | 1842 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1380 mm | 1473 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2790 mm | 2880 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 9.4 L/100km | 9 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 13.8 L/100km | 14.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 70 L | 68 L |
