2005 BMW 530 vs. 2006 Cadillac CTS
To start off, 2006 Cadillac CTS is newer by 1 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2005 BMW 530. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2005 BMW 530 would be higher. At 5,965 cc, 2006 Cadillac CTS is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Cadillac CTS (400 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 175 more horse power than 2005 BMW 530. (225 HP @ 5900 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2006 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 2005 BMW 530.
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, 2006 Cadillac CTS (536 Nm @ 4400 RPM) has 246 more torque (in Nm) than 2005 BMW 530. (290 Nm @ 3500 RPM). This means 2006 Cadillac CTS will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2005 BMW 530.
Compare all specifications:
2005 BMW 530 | 2006 Cadillac CTS | |
Make | BMW | Cadillac |
Model | 530 | CTS |
Year Released | 2005 | 2006 |
Body Type | Sedan | Sedan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2926 cc | 5965 cc |
Horse Power | 225 HP | 400 HP |
Engine RPM | 5900 RPM | 6000 RPM |
Torque | 290 Nm | 536 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3500 RPM | 4400 RPM |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4850 mm | 4870 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1850 mm | 1800 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1470 mm | 1460 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2890 mm | 2890 mm |
Fuel Consumption | 6.8 L/100km | 9.6 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 12.8 L/100km | 14.9 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 9 L/100km | 12.5 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 70 L | 64 L |