2006 Cadillac SRX vs. 2009 Land Rover LR2
To start off, 2009 Land Rover LR2 is newer by 3 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2006 Cadillac SRX. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2006 Cadillac SRX would be higher. At 3,562 cc (6 cylinders), 2006 Cadillac SRX is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Cadillac SRX (256 HP @ 6500 RPM) has 29 more horse power than 2009 Land Rover LR2. (227 HP @ 6300 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2006 Cadillac SRX should accelerate faster than 2009 Land Rover LR2.
Both vehicles are four wheel drive (4WD) - it offers better handling, traction, and control in all driving conditions compared with front wheel drive or rear 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, 2006 Cadillac SRX (342 Nm @ 2800 RPM) has 108 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Land Rover LR2. (234 Nm @ 3200 RPM). This means 2006 Cadillac SRX will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Land Rover LR2.
Compare all specifications:
2006 Cadillac SRX | 2009 Land Rover LR2 | |
Make | Cadillac | Land Rover |
Model | SRX | LR2 |
Year Released | 2006 | 2009 |
Body Type | SUV | SUV |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3562 cc | 3192 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 256 HP | 227 HP |
Engine RPM | 6500 RPM | 6300 RPM |
Torque | 342 Nm | 234 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2800 RPM | 3200 RPM |
Engine Bore Size | 94 mm | 84 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 85 mm | 96 mm |
Engine Compression Ratio | 10.2:1 | 10.8:1 |
Top Speed | 201 km/hour | 199 km/hour |
Drive Type | 4WD | 4WD |
Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 5 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Width | 1850 mm | 1910 mm |