2004 Chevrolet Aveo vs. 2013 Cadillac ATS
To start off, 2013 Cadillac ATS is newer by 9 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Chevrolet Aveo. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Chevrolet Aveo would be higher. At 2,000 cc (4 cylinders), 2013 Cadillac ATS is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2013 Cadillac ATS (268 HP @ 5500 RPM) has 165 more horse power than 2004 Chevrolet Aveo. (103 HP @ 5600 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2013 Cadillac ATS should accelerate faster than 2004 Chevrolet Aveo. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2013 Cadillac ATS weights approximately 457 kg more than 2004 Chevrolet Aveo. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 2013 Cadillac ATS 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 2013 Cadillac ATS. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2004 Chevrolet Aveo, 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. Let's talk about torque, 2013 Cadillac ATS (353 Nm) has 208 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 Chevrolet Aveo. (145 Nm). This means 2013 Cadillac ATS will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 Chevrolet Aveo. 2013 Cadillac ATS has automatic transmission and 2004 Chevrolet Aveo has manual transmission. 2004 Chevrolet Aveo will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2013 Cadillac ATS will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 2004 Chevrolet Aveo | 2013 Cadillac ATS | |
| Make | Chevrolet | Cadillac |
| Model | Aveo | ATS |
| Year Released | 2004 | 2013 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1606 cc | 2000 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 103 HP | 268 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5600 RPM | 5500 RPM |
| Torque | 145 Nm | 353 Nm |
| Engine Bore Size | 79 mm | 86 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 82 mm | 86 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 9.5:1 | 9.5 |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | 6-speed automatic |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1073 kg | 1530 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4240 mm | 4643 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1680 mm | 1806 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1500 mm | 1410 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2490 mm | 2776 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 6.9 L/100km | 7.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 8.9 L/100km | 11.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 42 L | 61 L |
