2006 Cadillac CTS vs. 2012 Volvo XC90
To start off, 2012 Volvo XC90 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 5,965 cc, 2006 Cadillac CTS is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Cadillac CTS (400 HP) has 200 more horse power than 2012 Volvo XC90. (200 HP). In normal driving conditions, 2006 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 2012 Volvo XC90.
Because 2012 Volvo XC90 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, 2012 Volvo XC90 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, 2006 Cadillac CTS (536 Nm @ 4400 RPM) has 116 more torque (in Nm) than 2012 Volvo XC90. (420 Nm @ 1750 RPM). This means 2006 Cadillac CTS will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2012 Volvo XC90.
Compare all specifications:
| 2006 Cadillac CTS | 2012 Volvo XC90 | |
| Make | Cadillac | Volvo |
| Model | CTS | XC90 |
| Year Released | 2006 | 2012 |
| Body Type | Sedan | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 5965 cc | 2400 cc |
| Horse Power | 400 HP | 200 HP |
| Torque | 536 Nm | 420 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 | 4808 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1800 mm | 1897 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1460 mm | 1783 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2890 mm | 2860 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 64 L | 80 L |
