2006 Cadillac CTS vs. 2000 Subaru Forester
To start off, 2006 Cadillac CTS is newer by 6 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2000 Subaru Forester. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2000 Subaru Forester 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 80 kg more than 2000 Subaru Forester.
Because 2000 Subaru Forester is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2006 Cadillac CTS. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2000 Subaru Forester will offer significantly more control. 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 (263 Nm) has 77 more torque (in Nm) than 2000 Subaru Forester. (186 Nm). This means 2006 Cadillac CTS will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2000 Subaru Forester.
Compare all specifications:
2006 Cadillac CTS | 2000 Subaru Forester | |
Make | Cadillac | Subaru |
Model | CTS | Forester |
Year Released | 2006 | 2000 |
Body Type | Sedan | SUV |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2786 cc | 1994 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | boxer |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 211 HP | 0 HP |
Torque | 263 Nm | 186 Nm |
Engine Compression Ratio | 9.5:1 | 10.0:1 |
Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1592 kg | 1512 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4840 mm | 4470 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1800 mm | 1740 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1600 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2890 mm | 2680 mm |