2004 Ford Thunderbird vs. 2013 Cadillac XTS
To start off, 2013 Cadillac XTS is newer by 9 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Ford Thunderbird. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Ford Thunderbird would be higher. At 3,933 cc (8 cylinders), 2004 Ford Thunderbird is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2013 Cadillac XTS (314 HP @ 6800 RPM) has 34 more horse power than 2004 Ford Thunderbird. (280 HP @ 6000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2013 Cadillac XTS should accelerate faster than 2004 Ford Thunderbird. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2013 Cadillac XTS weights approximately 200 kg more than 2004 Ford Thunderbird. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 2013 Cadillac XTS is all wheel drive (AWD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2004 Ford Thunderbird. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2013 Cadillac XTS 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, 2004 Ford Thunderbird (388 Nm) has 30 more torque (in Nm) than 2013 Cadillac XTS. (358 Nm). This means 2004 Ford Thunderbird will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2013 Cadillac XTS.
Compare all specifications:
| 2004 Ford Thunderbird | 2013 Cadillac XTS | |
| Make | Ford | Cadillac |
| Model | Thunderbird | XTS |
| Year Released | 2004 | 2013 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3933 cc | 3564 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 280 HP | 314 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 6800 RPM |
| Torque | 388 Nm | 358 Nm |
| Engine Bore Size | 86 mm | 94 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 85 mm | 86 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 10.8:1 | 11.5 |
| Drive Type | Rear | AWD |
| Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1712 kg | 1912 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4740 mm | 5131 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1840 mm | 1852 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1330 mm | 1510 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2490 mm | 2831 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 10.2 L/100km | 9 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 13.8 L/100km | 13.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 12.4 L/100km | 11.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 68 L | 76 L |
