2006 Cadillac CTS vs. 1998 Mercedes-Benz CLK LM
To start off, 2006 Cadillac CTS is newer by 8 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1998 Mercedes-Benz CLK LM. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1998 Mercedes-Benz CLK LM would be higher. At 5,965 cc, 2006 Cadillac CTS is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1998 Mercedes-Benz CLK LM (664 HP @ 4200 RPM) has 264 more horse power than 2006 Cadillac CTS. (400 HP @ 6000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1998 Mercedes-Benz CLK LM should accelerate faster than 2006 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, 1998 Mercedes-Benz CLK LM (773 Nm) has 237 more torque (in Nm) than 2006 Cadillac CTS. (536 Nm). This means 1998 Mercedes-Benz CLK LM will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2006 Cadillac CTS.
Compare all specifications:
2006 Cadillac CTS | 1998 Mercedes-Benz CLK LM | |
Make | Cadillac | Mercedes-Benz |
Model | CTS | CLK LM |
Year Released | 2006 | 1998 |
Body Type | Sedan | Coupe |
Engine Position | Front | Middle |
Engine Size | 5965 cc | 5000 cc |
Horse Power | 400 HP | 664 HP |
Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 4200 RPM |
Torque | 536 Nm | 773 Nm |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 2 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4870 mm | 4860 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1800 mm | 1960 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1460 mm | 1170 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2890 mm | 2600 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 64 L | 60 L |