2006 Cadillac CTS vs. 2008 Volvo S60
To start off, 2008 Volvo S60 is newer by 2 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2006 Cadillac CTS. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2006 Cadillac CTS would be higher. At 5,965 cc, 2006 Cadillac CTS is equipped with a bigger engine.
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, 2008 Volvo S60, 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 206 more torque (in Nm) than 2008 Volvo S60. (330 Nm @ 2400 RPM). This means 2006 Cadillac CTS will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2008 Volvo S60.
Compare all specifications:
| 2006 Cadillac CTS | 2008 Volvo S60 | |
| Make | Cadillac | Volvo |
| Model | CTS | S60 |
| Year Released | 2006 | 2008 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 5965 cc | 2319 cc |
| Horse Power | 400 HP | 0 HP |
| Torque | 536 Nm | 330 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4400 RPM | 2400 RPM |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4870 mm | 4250 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1460 mm | 1450 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2890 mm | 2720 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 12.5 L/100km | 13.3 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 64 L | 70 L |
