2006 Cadillac CTS vs. 1993 Renault Safrane
To start off, 2006 Cadillac CTS is newer by 13 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1993 Renault Safrane. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1993 Renault Safrane would be higher. At 5,965 cc, 2006 Cadillac CTS is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Cadillac CTS (400 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 212 more horse power than 1993 Renault Safrane. (188 HP @ 5500 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2006 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 1993 Renault Safrane.
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, 1993 Renault Safrane, 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. Let's talk about torque, 2006 Cadillac CTS (536 Nm @ 4400 RPM) has 268 more torque (in Nm) than 1993 Renault Safrane. (268 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 2006 Cadillac CTS will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1993 Renault Safrane.
Compare all specifications:
| 2006 Cadillac CTS | 1993 Renault Safrane | |
| Make | Cadillac | Renault |
| Model | CTS | Safrane |
| Year Released | 2006 | 1993 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Hatchback |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 5965 cc | 2946 cc |
| Horse Power | 400 HP | 188 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 5500 RPM |
| Torque | 536 Nm | 268 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4400 RPM | 4000 RPM |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4870 mm | 4770 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1800 mm | 1820 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1460 mm | 1440 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2890 mm | 2770 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 9.6 L/100km | 8.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 14.9 L/100km | 16.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 12.5 L/100km | 11.6 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 64 L | 80 L |
