2005 Cadillac CTS vs. 2009 Ford E-350
To start off, 2009 Ford E-350 is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2005 Cadillac CTS. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2005 Cadillac CTS would be higher. At 5,406 cc (8 cylinders), 2009 Ford E-350 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, both vehicles can yield 255 horse power. So under normal driving conditions, the acceleration of both vehicles should be relatively similar. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2005 Cadillac CTS weights approximately 626 kg more than 2009 Ford E-350.
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, 2009 Ford E-350 (475 Nm) has 132 more torque (in Nm) than 2005 Cadillac CTS. (343 Nm). This means 2009 Ford E-350 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2005 Cadillac CTS.
Compare all specifications:
2005 Cadillac CTS | 2009 Ford E-350 | |
Make | Cadillac | Ford |
Model | CTS | E-350 |
Year Released | 2005 | 2009 |
Body Type | Sedan | Van |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3564 cc | 5406 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
Horse Power | 255 HP | 255 HP |
Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 4500 RPM |
Torque | 343 Nm | 475 Nm |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 12 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1592 kg | 966 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4840 mm | 5390 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1800 mm | 1790 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 2120 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2890 mm | 3510 mm |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 11.8 L/100km | 7.1 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 64 L | 132 L |