2006 Cadillac CTS vs. 2003 MCC Smart
To start off, 2006 Cadillac CTS is newer by 3 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2003 MCC Smart. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2003 MCC Smart 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) has 294 more horse power than 2003 MCC Smart. (106 HP). In normal driving conditions, 2006 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 2003 MCC Smart.
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, 2003 MCC Smart, 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) has 391 more torque (in Nm) than 2003 MCC Smart. (145 Nm). This means 2006 Cadillac CTS will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2003 MCC Smart.
Compare all specifications:
| 2006 Cadillac CTS | 2003 MCC Smart | |
| Make | Cadillac | MCC |
| Model | CTS | Smart |
| Year Released | 2006 | 2003 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Hatchback |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 5965 cc | 1499 cc |
| Horse Power | 400 HP | 106 HP |
| Torque | 536 Nm | 145 Nm |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4870 mm | 3760 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1800 mm | 1690 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1460 mm | 1460 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2890 mm | 2510 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 64 L | 47 L |
