2005 Chrysler Voyager vs. 2013 Cadillac CTS
To start off, 2013 Cadillac CTS is newer by 8 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2005 Chrysler Voyager. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2005 Chrysler Voyager would be higher. At 3,000 cc (6 cylinders), 2013 Cadillac CTS is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2013 Cadillac CTS (266 HP @ 6800 RPM) has 126 more horse power than 2005 Chrysler Voyager. (140 HP @ 4000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2013 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 2005 Chrysler Voyager. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2005 Chrysler Voyager weights approximately 272 kg more than 2013 Cadillac CTS.
Because 2013 Cadillac CTS 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 2013 Cadillac CTS. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2005 Chrysler Voyager, 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, 2013 Cadillac CTS (373 Nm @ 4900 RPM) has 53 more torque (in Nm) than 2005 Chrysler Voyager. (320 Nm @ 2000 RPM). This means 2013 Cadillac CTS will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2005 Chrysler Voyager. 2013 Cadillac CTS has automatic transmission and 2005 Chrysler Voyager has manual transmission. 2005 Chrysler Voyager will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2013 Cadillac CTS will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 2005 Chrysler Voyager | 2013 Cadillac CTS | |
| Make | Chrysler | Cadillac |
| Model | Voyager | CTS |
| Year Released | 2005 | 2013 |
| Body Type | Minivan | Coupe |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2499 cc | 3000 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 140 HP | 266 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4000 RPM | 6800 RPM |
| Torque | 320 Nm | 373 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2000 RPM | 4900 RPM |
| Engine Bore Size | 92 mm | 94 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 94 mm | 86 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 18.0:1 | 11.3 |
| Fuel Type | Diesel | Gasoline |
| Acceleration 0-100mph | 12.9 seconds | 7.3 seconds |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | 6-speed automatic |
| Number of Seats | 7 seats | 4 seats |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 2040 kg | 1768 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4810 mm | 4788 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 2000 mm | 1882 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1760 mm | 1422 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2880 mm | 2880 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 7.7 L/100km | 11.2 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 75 L | 68 L |
