2006 BMW 530 vs. 2012 Cadillac CTS
To start off, 2012 Cadillac CTS is newer by 6 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2006 BMW 530. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2006 BMW 530 would be higher. At 3,000 cc (6 cylinders), 2012 Cadillac CTS is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2012 Cadillac CTS (270 HP @ 7000 RPM) has 15 more horse power than 2006 BMW 530. (255 HP @ 6600 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2012 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 2006 BMW 530.
Because 2006 BMW 530 is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2012 Cadillac CTS. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2006 BMW 530 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, 2012 Cadillac CTS (302 Nm @ 5700 RPM) has 4 more torque (in Nm) than 2006 BMW 530. (298 Nm @ 2750 RPM). This means 2012 Cadillac CTS will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2006 BMW 530.
Compare all specifications:
| 2006 BMW 530 | 2012 Cadillac CTS | |
| Make | BMW | Cadillac |
| Model | 530 | CTS |
| Year Released | 2006 | 2012 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Coupe |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2998 cc | 3000 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 255 HP | 270 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6600 RPM | 7000 RPM |
| Torque | 298 Nm | 302 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2750 RPM | 5700 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline - Premium | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | 4WD | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | 6-speed manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4860 mm | 4788 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1850 mm | 1842 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1470 mm | 1422 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2890 mm | 2880 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 8.4 L/100km | 9 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 12.4 L/100km | 14.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 70 L | 68 L |
