2005 Volvo S60 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 Volvo S60. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2005 Volvo S60 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 @ 7000 RPM) has 98 more horse power than 2005 Volvo S60. (168 HP @ 4000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2013 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 2005 Volvo S60. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2013 Cadillac CTS weights approximately 251 kg more than 2005 Volvo S60. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
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 Volvo S60, 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 Volvo S60 (331 Nm @ 1750 RPM) has 29 more torque (in Nm) than 2013 Cadillac CTS. (302 Nm @ 5700 RPM). This means 2005 Volvo S60 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2013 Cadillac CTS. 2013 Cadillac CTS has automatic transmission and 2005 Volvo S60 has manual transmission. 2005 Volvo S60 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 Volvo S60 | 2013 Cadillac CTS | |
| Make | Volvo | Cadillac |
| Model | S60 | CTS |
| Year Released | 2005 | 2013 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Station Wagon |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2383 cc | 3000 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 5 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 168 HP | 266 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4000 RPM | 7000 RPM |
| Torque | 331 Nm | 302 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 1750 RPM | 5700 RPM |
| Engine Bore Size | 81 mm | 89 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 93.2 mm | 80 mm |
| Fuel Type | Diesel | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | 6-speed automatic |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1570 kg | 1821 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4580 mm | 4877 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1810 mm | 1842 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1430 mm | 1473 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2760 mm | 2880 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 7.5 L/100km | 10.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 70 L | 68 L |
