2004 Cadillac CTS vs. 2003 Jeep Grand Cherokee
To start off, 2004 Cadillac CTS is newer by 1 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2003 Jeep Grand Cherokee. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2003 Jeep Grand Cherokee would be higher. At 3,966 cc (6 cylinders), 2003 Jeep Grand Cherokee is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Cadillac CTS (215 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 20 more horse power than 2003 Jeep Grand Cherokee. (195 HP @ 3800 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2004 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 2003 Jeep Grand Cherokee. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2003 Jeep Grand Cherokee weights approximately 10 kg more than 2004 Cadillac CTS.
Let's talk about torque, 2003 Jeep Grand Cherokee (312 Nm @ 3000 RPM) has 12 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 Cadillac CTS. (300 Nm @ 3400 RPM). This means 2003 Jeep Grand Cherokee will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 Cadillac CTS.
Compare all specifications:
2004 Cadillac CTS | 2003 Jeep Grand Cherokee | |
Make | Cadillac | Jeep |
Model | CTS | Grand Cherokee |
Year Released | 2004 | 2003 |
Body Type | Sedan | SUV |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3173 cc | 3966 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
Horse Power | 215 HP | 195 HP |
Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 3800 RPM |
Torque | 300 Nm | 312 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3400 RPM | 3000 RPM |
Engine Compression Ratio | 10.0:1 | 8.8:1 |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1790 kg | 1800 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4830 mm | 4610 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1800 mm | 1840 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1770 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2750 mm | 2700 mm |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 11 L/100km | 13.1 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 68 L | 78 L |