2005 Ford Mustang 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 Ford Mustang. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2005 Ford Mustang would be higher. At 4,015 cc (6 cylinders), 2005 Ford Mustang is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2013 Cadillac CTS (314 HP @ 6800 RPM) has 112 more horse power than 2005 Ford Mustang. (202 HP @ 6000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2013 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 2005 Ford Mustang. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2013 Cadillac CTS weights approximately 456 kg more than 2005 Ford Mustang. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 2013 Cadillac CTS is all wheel drive (AWD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2005 Ford Mustang. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2013 Cadillac CTS will offer significantly more control. 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) has 47 more torque (in Nm) than 2005 Ford Mustang. (326 Nm). This means 2013 Cadillac CTS will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2005 Ford Mustang.
Compare all specifications:
2005 Ford Mustang | 2013 Cadillac CTS | |
Make | Ford | Cadillac |
Model | Mustang | CTS |
Year Released | 2005 | 2013 |
Body Type | Coupe | Station Wagon |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 4015 cc | 3600 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 202 HP | 314 HP |
Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 6800 RPM |
Torque | 326 Nm | 373 Nm |
Engine Bore Size | 100 mm | 94 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 84 mm | 86 mm |
Drive Type | Rear | AWD |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1497 kg | 1953 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4770 mm | 4877 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1890 mm | 1842 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1390 mm | 1473 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2620 mm | 2880 mm |
Fuel Consumption | 8.4 L/100km | 9 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 12.4 L/100km | 13 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 10.7 L/100km | 11.2 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 61 L | 68 L |