2004 Isuzu Rodeo vs. 2013 Cadillac CTS
To start off, 2013 Cadillac CTS is newer by 9 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Isuzu Rodeo. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Isuzu Rodeo would be higher. At 3,163 cc (6 cylinders), 2004 Isuzu Rodeo is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2013 Cadillac CTS (266 HP) has 61 more horse power than 2004 Isuzu Rodeo. (205 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2013 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 2004 Isuzu Rodeo. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2004 Isuzu Rodeo weights approximately 53 kg more than 2013 Cadillac CTS.
Because 2004 Isuzu Rodeo is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2013 Cadillac CTS. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2004 Isuzu Rodeo 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, 2013 Cadillac CTS (302 Nm) has 12 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 Isuzu Rodeo. (290 Nm). This means 2013 Cadillac CTS will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 Isuzu Rodeo.
Compare all specifications:
| 2004 Isuzu Rodeo | 2013 Cadillac CTS | |
| Make | Isuzu | Cadillac |
| Model | Rodeo | CTS |
| Year Released | 2004 | 2013 |
| Body Type | SUV | Station Wagon |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3163 cc | 3000 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 205 HP | 266 HP |
| Torque | 290 Nm | 302 Nm |
| Engine Bore Size | 93 mm | 89 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 77 mm | 80 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 9.1:1 | 11.7 |
| Drive Type | 4WD | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1874 kg | 1821 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4520 mm | 4877 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1790 mm | 1842 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1770 mm | 1473 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2710 mm | 2880 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 10.2 L/100km | 8.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 13.8 L/100km | 13 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 12.4 L/100km | 10.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 74 L | 68 L |
