2006 Cadillac CTS vs. 2002 Skoda Octavia
To start off, 2006 Cadillac CTS is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2002 Skoda Octavia. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2002 Skoda Octavia 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 311 more horse power than 2002 Skoda Octavia. (89 HP @ 3750 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2006 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 2002 Skoda Octavia.
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, 2002 Skoda Octavia, 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 325 more torque (in Nm) than 2002 Skoda Octavia. (211 Nm @ 1900 RPM). This means 2006 Cadillac CTS will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2002 Skoda Octavia.
Compare all specifications:
2006 Cadillac CTS | 2002 Skoda Octavia | |
Make | Cadillac | Skoda |
Model | CTS | Octavia |
Year Released | 2006 | 2002 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 5965 cc | 1896 cc |
Horse Power | 400 HP | 89 HP |
Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 3750 RPM |
Torque | 536 Nm | 211 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4400 RPM | 1900 RPM |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4870 mm | 4520 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1800 mm | 1740 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1460 mm | 1460 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2890 mm | 2520 mm |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 12.5 L/100km | 5.1 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 64 L | 55 L |