2005 Cadillac XLR vs. 2010 Holden Commodore
To start off, 2010 Holden Commodore is newer by 5 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2005 Cadillac XLR. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2005 Cadillac XLR would be higher. At 4,565 cc (8 cylinders), 2005 Cadillac XLR is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2005 Cadillac XLR (320 HP) has 80 more horse power than 2010 Holden Commodore. (240 HP). In normal driving conditions, 2005 Cadillac XLR should accelerate faster than 2010 Holden Commodore.
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, 2005 Cadillac XLR (400 Nm) has 160 more torque (in Nm) than 2010 Holden Commodore. (240 Nm). This means 2005 Cadillac XLR will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2010 Holden Commodore.
Compare all specifications:
| 2005 Cadillac XLR | 2010 Holden Commodore | |
| Make | Cadillac | Holden |
| Model | XLR | Commodore |
| Year Released | 2005 | 2010 |
| Body Type | Convertible | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4565 cc | 2564 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Horse Power | 320 HP | 240 HP |
| Torque | 400 Nm | 240 Nm |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 12.4 L/100km | 10.9 L/100km |
