2006 Cadillac CTS vs. 1989 Mercury Sable
To start off, 2006 Cadillac CTS is newer by 17 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1989 Mercury Sable. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1989 Mercury Sable would be higher. At 2,786 cc (6 cylinders), 2006 Cadillac CTS is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2006 Cadillac CTS weights approximately 192 kg more than 1989 Mercury Sable.
Because 2006 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 2006 Cadillac CTS. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1989 Mercury Sable, 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.
Compare all specifications:
2006 Cadillac CTS | 1989 Mercury Sable | |
Make | Cadillac | Mercury |
Model | CTS | Sable |
Year Released | 2006 | 1989 |
Body Type | Sedan | Sedan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2786 cc | 2513 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 211 HP | 0 HP |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 6 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1592 kg | 1400 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4840 mm | 4790 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1800 mm | 1810 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2890 mm | 2700 mm |