2006 Cadillac CTS vs. 2010 BMW X5
To start off, 2010 BMW X5 is newer by 4 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. In terms of performance, 2006 Cadillac CTS (400 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 156 more horse power than 2010 BMW X5. (244 HP @ 4000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2006 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 2010 BMW X5.
Because 2010 BMW X5 is all wheel drive (AWD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2006 Cadillac CTS. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2010 BMW X5 will offer significantly more control. 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, 2010 BMW X5 (540 Nm @ 1750 RPM) has 4 more torque (in Nm) than 2006 Cadillac CTS. (536 Nm @ 4400 RPM). This means 2010 BMW X5 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2006 Cadillac CTS.
Compare all specifications:
| 2006 Cadillac CTS | 2010 BMW X5 | |
| Make | Cadillac | BMW |
| Model | CTS | X5 |
| Year Released | 2006 | 2010 |
| Body Type | Sedan | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 5965 cc | 2993 cc |
| Horse Power | 400 HP | 244 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 4000 RPM |
| Torque | 536 Nm | 540 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4400 RPM | 1750 RPM |
| Drive Type | Rear | AWD |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4870 mm | 4857 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1800 mm | 1933 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1460 mm | 1776 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2890 mm | 2934 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 9.6 L/100km | 6.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 14.9 L/100km | 8.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 12.5 L/100km | 7.4 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 64 L | 85 L |
