2004 Cadillac CTS vs. 1998 Mercury Villager
To start off, 2004 Cadillac CTS is newer by 6 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1998 Mercury Villager. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1998 Mercury Villager would be higher. At 2,960 cc (6 cylinders), 1998 Mercury Villager is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Cadillac CTS (179 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 30 more horse power than 1998 Mercury Villager. (149 HP @ 4800 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2004 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 1998 Mercury Villager. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1998 Mercury Villager weights approximately 20 kg more than 2004 Cadillac CTS.
Because 2004 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 2004 Cadillac CTS. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1998 Mercury Villager, 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:
2004 Cadillac CTS | 1998 Mercury Villager | |
Make | Cadillac | Mercury |
Model | CTS | Villager |
Year Released | 2004 | 1998 |
Body Type | Sedan | Minivan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2597 cc | 2960 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
Horse Power | 179 HP | 149 HP |
Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 4800 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline - Premium | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Vehicle Weight | 1780 kg | 1800 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4830 mm | 4950 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1800 mm | 1910 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1790 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2950 mm | 2860 mm |