2006 Cadillac CTS vs. 1992 Jaguar XJR
To start off, 2006 Cadillac CTS is newer by 14 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1992 Jaguar XJR. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1992 Jaguar XJR would be higher. At 5,992 cc (12 cylinders), 1992 Jaguar XJR is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Cadillac CTS (400 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 67 more horse power than 1992 Jaguar XJR. (333 HP @ 5250 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2006 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 1992 Jaguar XJR.
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 Cadillac CTS (536 Nm @ 4400 RPM) has 41 more torque (in Nm) than 1992 Jaguar XJR. (495 Nm @ 3650 RPM). This means 2006 Cadillac CTS will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1992 Jaguar XJR.
Compare all specifications:
| 2006 Cadillac CTS | 1992 Jaguar XJR | |
| Make | Cadillac | Jaguar |
| Model | CTS | XJR |
| Year Released | 2006 | 1992 |
| Engine Position | Front | Middle |
| Engine Size | 5965 cc | 5992 cc |
| Horse Power | 400 HP | 333 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 5250 RPM |
| Torque | 536 Nm | 495 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4400 RPM | 3650 RPM |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4870 mm | 4770 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1800 mm | 1890 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1460 mm | 1270 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2890 mm | 2600 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 9.6 L/100km | 14 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 14.9 L/100km | 21.3 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 12.5 L/100km | 13.2 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 64 L | 89 L |
