2006 BMW 530 vs. 2006 Cadillac CTS
To start off, both 2006 BMW 530 and 2006 Cadillac CTS were released in the same year (2006). Therefore the support and the availability on parts for both vehicles should be relatively similar. At 2,999 cc (6 cylinders), 2006 BMW 530 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 BMW 530 (255 HP @ 6600 RPM) has 44 more horse power than 2006 Cadillac CTS. (211 HP @ 6500 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2006 BMW 530 should accelerate faster than 2006 Cadillac CTS.
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, 2006 BMW 530 (298 Nm @ 2750 RPM) has 35 more torque (in Nm) than 2006 Cadillac CTS. (263 Nm @ 3300 RPM). This means 2006 BMW 530 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2006 Cadillac CTS.
Compare all specifications:
| 2006 BMW 530 | 2006 Cadillac CTS | |
| Make | BMW | Cadillac |
| Model | 530 | CTS |
| Year Released | 2006 | 2006 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2999 cc | 2786 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 255 HP | 211 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6600 RPM | 6500 RPM |
| Torque | 298 Nm | 263 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2750 RPM | 3300 RPM |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 17.0:1 | 9.5:1 |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline - Premium | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4860 mm | 4840 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1850 mm | 1800 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1470 mm | 1450 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2890 mm | 2890 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 8 L/100km | 8.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 11.9 L/100km | 13.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 10 L/100km | 11.2 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 70 L | 64 L |
