2006 Cadillac CTS vs. 2003 Volvo C70
To start off, 2006 Cadillac CTS is newer by 3 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2003 Volvo C70. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2003 Volvo C70 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 240 more horse power than 2003 Volvo C70. (160 HP @ 5100 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2006 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 2003 Volvo C70.
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 Volvo C70, 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 306 more torque (in Nm) than 2003 Volvo C70. (230 Nm @ 1800 RPM). This means 2006 Cadillac CTS will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2003 Volvo C70.
Compare all specifications:
| 2006 Cadillac CTS | 2003 Volvo C70 | |
| Make | Cadillac | Volvo |
| Model | CTS | C70 |
| Year Released | 2006 | 2003 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Coupe |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 5965 cc | 1984 cc |
| Horse Power | 400 HP | 160 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 5100 RPM |
| Torque | 536 Nm | 230 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4400 RPM | 1800 RPM |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4870 mm | 4730 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1800 mm | 1830 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1460 mm | 1420 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2890 mm | 2670 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 64 L | 68 L |
