2006 Cadillac CTS vs. 2012 Ford F-450
To start off, 2012 Ford F-450 is newer by 6 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 6,700 cc (8 cylinders), 2012 Ford F-450 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2012 Ford F-450 (399 HP @ 2800 RPM) has 188 more horse power than 2006 Cadillac CTS. (211 HP @ 6500 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2012 Ford F-450 should accelerate faster than 2006 Cadillac CTS.
Because 2012 Ford F-450 is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2006 Cadillac CTS. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2012 Ford F-450 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, 2012 Ford F-450 (1,085 Nm @ 1600 RPM) has 822 more torque (in Nm) than 2006 Cadillac CTS. (263 Nm @ 3300 RPM). This means 2012 Ford F-450 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2006 Cadillac CTS.
Compare all specifications:
| 2006 Cadillac CTS | 2012 Ford F-450 | |
| Make | Cadillac | Ford |
| Model | CTS | F-450 |
| Year Released | 2006 | 2012 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Pickup |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2786 cc | 6700 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 211 HP | 399 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6500 RPM | 2800 RPM |
| Torque | 263 Nm | 1085 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3300 RPM | 1600 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Diesel |
| Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4840 mm | 6680 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1800 mm | 2438 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 2024 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2890 mm | 4379 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 64 L | 142 L |
