2006 Cadillac CTS vs. 2005 Mazda B2300
To start off, 2006 Cadillac CTS is newer by 1 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2005 Mazda B2300. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2005 Mazda B2300 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 252 more horse power than 2005 Mazda B2300. (148 HP @ 4000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2006 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 2005 Mazda B2300.
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, 2006 Cadillac CTS (536 Nm) has 327 more torque (in Nm) than 2005 Mazda B2300. (209 Nm). This means 2006 Cadillac CTS will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2005 Mazda B2300.
Compare all specifications:
2006 Cadillac CTS | 2005 Mazda B2300 | |
Make | Cadillac | Mazda |
Model | CTS | B2300 |
Year Released | 2006 | 2005 |
Body Type | Sedan | Pickup |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 5965 cc | 2262 cc |
Horse Power | 400 HP | 148 HP |
Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 4000 RPM |
Torque | 536 Nm | 209 Nm |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 3 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4870 mm | 4770 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1800 mm | 1770 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1460 mm | 1650 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2890 mm | 2840 mm |
Fuel Consumption Highway | 9.6 L/100km | 8.1 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 14.9 L/100km | 9.8 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 12.5 L/100km | 9.1 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 64 L | 62 L |