2006 Cadillac CTS vs. 2006 Ford Ranger
To start off, both 2006 Cadillac CTS and 2006 Ford Ranger were released in the same year (2006). Therefore the support and the availability on parts for both vehicles should be relatively similar. 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 292 more horse power than 2006 Ford Ranger. (108 HP @ 3500 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2006 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 2006 Ford Ranger.
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 @ 4400 RPM) has 279 more torque (in Nm) than 2006 Ford Ranger. (257 Nm @ 2000 RPM). This means 2006 Cadillac CTS will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2006 Ford Ranger.
Compare all specifications:
| 2006 Cadillac CTS | 2006 Ford Ranger | |
| Make | Cadillac | Ford |
| Model | CTS | Ranger |
| Year Released | 2006 | 2006 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Pickup |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 5965 cc | 2498 cc |
| Horse Power | 400 HP | 108 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 3500 RPM |
| Torque | 536 Nm | 257 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4400 RPM | 2000 RPM |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 2 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4870 mm | 4670 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1460 mm | 1350 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2890 mm | 2990 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 12.5 L/100km | 11.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 64 L | 80 L |
