2006 Cadillac CTS vs. 2010 Nissan Frontier
To start off, 2010 Nissan Frontier 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 3,953 cc (8 cylinders), 2010 Nissan Frontier is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2010 Nissan Frontier (257 HP @ 5600 RPM) has 46 more horse power than 2006 Cadillac CTS. (211 HP @ 6500 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Nissan Frontier 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 Nissan Frontier (281 Nm @ 4000 RPM) has 18 more torque (in Nm) than 2006 Cadillac CTS. (263 Nm @ 3300 RPM). This means 2010 Nissan Frontier will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2006 Cadillac CTS.
Compare all specifications:
2006 Cadillac CTS | 2010 Nissan Frontier | |
Make | Cadillac | Nissan |
Model | CTS | Frontier |
Year Released | 2006 | 2010 |
Body Type | Sedan | Pickup |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2786 cc | 3953 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 3 valves |
Horse Power | 211 HP | 257 HP |
Engine RPM | 6500 RPM | 5600 RPM |
Torque | 263 Nm | 281 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3300 RPM | 4000 RPM |
Engine Compression Ratio | 9.5:1 | 9.7:1 |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Width | 1800 mm | 1860 mm |
Fuel Consumption | 8.7 L/100km | 15.7 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 13.8 L/100km | 14.7 L/100km |