2004 Cadillac CTS vs. 2002 Volkswagen Phaeton
To start off, 2004 Cadillac CTS is newer by 2 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2002 Volkswagen Phaeton. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2002 Volkswagen Phaeton would be higher. At 5,996 cc (12 cylinders), 2002 Volkswagen Phaeton is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2002 Volkswagen Phaeton (414 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 194 more horse power than 2004 Cadillac CTS. (220 HP @ 6000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2002 Volkswagen Phaeton should accelerate faster than 2004 Cadillac CTS. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2002 Volkswagen Phaeton weights approximately 705 kg more than 2004 Cadillac CTS. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 2002 Volkswagen Phaeton is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2004 Cadillac CTS. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2002 Volkswagen Phaeton will offer significantly more control. 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, 2002 Volkswagen Phaeton (550 Nm) has 252 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 Cadillac CTS. (298 Nm). This means 2002 Volkswagen Phaeton will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 Cadillac CTS.
Compare all specifications:
| 2004 Cadillac CTS | 2002 Volkswagen Phaeton | |
| Make | Cadillac | Volkswagen |
| Model | CTS | Phaeton |
| Year Released | 2004 | 2002 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3179 cc | 5996 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 12 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | W |
| Horse Power | 220 HP | 414 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Torque | 298 Nm | 550 Nm |
| Engine Bore Size | 87 mm | 84 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 88 mm | 90.2 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 10.0:1 | 10.8:1 |
| Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1592 kg | 2297 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4840 mm | 5060 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1800 mm | 1910 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1460 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2890 mm | 2890 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 9.2 L/100km | 10.9 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 12.5 L/100km | 23.9 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 11.4 L/100km | 15.6 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 66 L | 90 L |
