2004 Cadillac CTS vs. 2008 Ford F-450
To start off, 2008 Ford F-450 is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Cadillac CTS. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Cadillac CTS would be higher. At 6,400 cc (8 cylinders), 2008 Ford F-450 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2008 Ford F-450 (350 HP @ 3000 RPM) has 130 more horse power than 2004 Cadillac CTS. (220 HP @ 6000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2008 Ford F-450 should accelerate faster than 2004 Cadillac CTS.
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, 2008 Ford F-450 (881 Nm) has 583 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 Cadillac CTS. (298 Nm). This means 2008 Ford F-450 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 Cadillac CTS.
Compare all specifications:
| 2004 Cadillac CTS | 2008 Ford F-450 | |
| Make | Cadillac | Ford |
| Model | CTS | F-450 |
| Year Released | 2004 | 2008 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Pickup |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3179 cc | 6400 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 220 HP | 350 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 3000 RPM |
| Torque | 298 Nm | 881 Nm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 10.0:1 | 11.0:1 |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 6 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4840 mm | 6670 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1800 mm | 2430 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 2030 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2890 mm | 4390 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 11.4 L/100km | 5.3 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 66 L | 144 L |
