2006 Cadillac CTS vs. 2010 Dodge Challenger
To start off, 2010 Dodge Challenger 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 6,100 cc (8 cylinders), 2010 Dodge Challenger is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2010 Dodge Challenger (425 HP @ 6200 RPM) has 25 more horse power than 2006 Cadillac CTS. (400 HP @ 6000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Dodge Challenger should accelerate faster than 2006 Cadillac CTS.
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, 2010 Dodge Challenger (569 Nm @ 4800 RPM) has 33 more torque (in Nm) than 2006 Cadillac CTS. (536 Nm @ 4400 RPM). This means 2010 Dodge Challenger will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2006 Cadillac CTS.
Compare all specifications:
2006 Cadillac CTS | 2010 Dodge Challenger | |
Make | Cadillac | Dodge |
Model | CTS | Challenger |
Year Released | 2006 | 2010 |
Body Type | Sedan | Coupe |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 5965 cc | 6100 cc |
Horse Power | 400 HP | 425 HP |
Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 6200 RPM |
Torque | 536 Nm | 569 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4400 RPM | 4800 RPM |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4870 mm | 5022 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1800 mm | 1923 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1460 mm | 1450 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2890 mm | 2946 mm |
Fuel Consumption | 9.6 L/100km | 10.7 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 14.9 L/100km | 16.8 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 64 L | 72 L |