2006 BMW M6 vs. 2013 Cadillac CTS
To start off, 2013 Cadillac CTS is newer by 7 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2006 BMW M6. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2006 BMW M6 would be higher. At 4,997 cc (10 cylinders), 2006 BMW M6 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 BMW M6 (500 HP @ 7750 RPM) has 186 more horse power than 2013 Cadillac CTS. (314 HP @ 6800 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2006 BMW M6 should accelerate faster than 2013 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 M6 (519 Nm @ 6100 RPM) has 146 more torque (in Nm) than 2013 Cadillac CTS. (373 Nm @ 4900 RPM). This means 2006 BMW M6 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2013 Cadillac CTS.
Compare all specifications:
2006 BMW M6 | 2013 Cadillac CTS | |
Make | BMW | Cadillac |
Model | M6 | CTS |
Year Released | 2006 | 2013 |
Body Type | Coupe | Sedan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 4997 cc | 3600 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 10 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 500 HP | 314 HP |
Engine RPM | 7750 RPM | 6800 RPM |
Torque | 519 Nm | 373 Nm |
Torque RPM | 6100 RPM | 4900 RPM |
Engine Bore Size | 92 mm | 94 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 75.2 mm | 86 mm |
Engine Compression Ratio | 12.0:1 | 11.3 |
Fuel Type | Gasoline - Premium | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4880 mm | 4859 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1860 mm | 1842 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1380 mm | 1473 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2790 mm | 2880 mm |
Fuel Consumption Highway | 13.1 L/100km | 8.7 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 19.6 L/100km | 13 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 70 L | 68 L |