2006 Cadillac CTS vs. 2013 Volvo C30
To start off, 2013 Volvo C30 is newer by 7 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 176 more horse power than 2013 Volvo C30. (224 HP @ 5000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2006 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 2013 Volvo C30.
Because 2006 Cadillac CTS is rear wheel drive (RWD), it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, it will be much easier to do with 2006 Cadillac CTS. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2013 Volvo C30, being front wheel drive (FWD), will offer much better control with better grip. 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 216 more torque (in Nm) than 2013 Volvo C30. (320 Nm @ 5000 RPM). This means 2006 Cadillac CTS will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2013 Volvo C30.
Compare all specifications:
2006 Cadillac CTS | 2013 Volvo C30 | |
Make | Cadillac | Volvo |
Model | CTS | C30 |
Year Released | 2006 | 2013 |
Body Type | Sedan | Coupe |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 5965 cc | 2500 cc |
Horse Power | 400 HP | 224 HP |
Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 5000 RPM |
Torque | 536 Nm | 320 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4400 RPM | 5000 RPM |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4870 mm | 4266 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1800 mm | 2039 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1460 mm | 1447 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2890 mm | 2640 mm |
Fuel Consumption Highway | 9.6 L/100km | 6.8 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 14.9 L/100km | 10.2 L/100km |