2006 Cadillac CTS vs. 1997 Chrysler Concorde
To start off, 2006 Cadillac CTS is newer by 9 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1997 Chrysler Concorde. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1997 Chrysler Concorde would be higher. At 3,299 cc (6 cylinders), 1997 Chrysler Concorde is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2006 Cadillac CTS weights approximately 22 kg more than 1997 Chrysler Concorde.
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, 1997 Chrysler Concorde, 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 | 1997 Chrysler Concorde | |
Make | Cadillac | Chrysler |
Model | CTS | Concorde |
Year Released | 2006 | 1997 |
Body Type | Sedan | Sedan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2786 cc | 3299 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 211 HP | 0 HP |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1592 kg | 1570 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4840 mm | 5120 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1800 mm | 1900 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1440 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2890 mm | 2880 mm |