2005 Buick LeSabre vs. 2009 Cadillac SRX
To start off, 2009 Cadillac SRX is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2005 Buick LeSabre. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2005 Buick LeSabre would be higher. At 3,800 cc (6 cylinders), 2005 Buick LeSabre is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Cadillac SRX (252 HP @ 6500 RPM) has 47 more horse power than 2005 Buick LeSabre. (205 HP @ 5200 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Cadillac SRX should accelerate faster than 2005 Buick LeSabre.
Because 2009 Cadillac SRX 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 2009 Cadillac SRX. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2005 Buick LeSabre, 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, 2005 Buick LeSabre (312 Nm) has 58 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Cadillac SRX. (254 Nm). This means 2005 Buick LeSabre will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Cadillac SRX.
Compare all specifications:
2005 Buick LeSabre | 2009 Cadillac SRX | |
Make | Buick | Cadillac |
Model | LeSabre | SRX |
Year Released | 2005 | 2009 |
Body Type | Sedan | SUV |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3800 cc | 3564 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 205 HP | 252 HP |
Engine RPM | 5200 RPM | 6500 RPM |
Torque | 312 Nm | 254 Nm |
Engine Compression Ratio | 9.4:1 | 10.2:1 |
Drive Type | Front | Rear |
Number of Seats | 6 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Width | 1870 mm | 1850 mm |
Fuel Consumption | 8.1 L/100km | 10.7 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 11.8 L/100km | 15.7 L/100km |