2006 Cadillac DTS vs. 2004 Ford E-250
To start off, 2006 Cadillac DTS is newer by 2 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Ford E-250. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Ford E-250 would be higher. At 4,605 cc (8 cylinders), 2004 Ford E-250 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Cadillac DTS (275 HP @ 5200 RPM) has 50 more horse power than 2004 Ford E-250. (225 HP @ 6150 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2006 Cadillac DTS should accelerate faster than 2004 Ford E-250.
Let's talk about torque, 2006 Cadillac DTS (396 Nm) has 7 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 Ford E-250. (389 Nm). This means 2006 Cadillac DTS will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 Ford E-250.
Compare all specifications:
| 2006 Cadillac DTS | 2004 Ford E-250 | |
| Make | Cadillac | Ford |
| Model | DTS | E-250 |
| Year Released | 2006 | 2004 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Van |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4572 cc | 4605 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 275 HP | 225 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5200 RPM | 6150 RPM |
| Torque | 396 Nm | 389 Nm |
| Engine Bore Size | 93 mm | 90 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 84 mm | 90 mm |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 2 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 3 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 5280 mm | 5900 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1910 mm | 2020 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1470 mm | 2140 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2940 mm | 3510 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 9.4 L/100km | 12.4 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 13.8 L/100km | 15.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 11.8 L/100km | 13.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 68 L | 132 L |
