2006 Cadillac STS-V vs. 2004 Mitsubishi Endeavor
To start off, 2006 Cadillac STS-V is newer by 2 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Mitsubishi Endeavor. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Mitsubishi Endeavor would be higher. At 4,376 cc (8 cylinders), 2006 Cadillac STS-V is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Cadillac STS-V (440 HP @ 6400 RPM) has 215 more horse power than 2004 Mitsubishi Endeavor. (225 HP @ 4000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2006 Cadillac STS-V should accelerate faster than 2004 Mitsubishi Endeavor.
Because 2004 Mitsubishi Endeavor is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2006 Cadillac STS-V. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2004 Mitsubishi Endeavor 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 STS-V (584 Nm) has 245 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 Mitsubishi Endeavor. (339 Nm). This means 2006 Cadillac STS-V will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 Mitsubishi Endeavor.
Compare all specifications:
| 2006 Cadillac STS-V | 2004 Mitsubishi Endeavor | |
| Make | Cadillac | Mitsubishi |
| Model | STS-V | Endeavor |
| Year Released | 2006 | 2004 |
| Body Type | Sedan | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4376 cc | 3835 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Horse Power | 440 HP | 225 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6400 RPM | 4000 RPM |
| Torque | 584 Nm | 339 Nm |
| Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4990 mm | 4840 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1850 mm | 1880 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1480 mm | 1790 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2960 mm | 2730 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 11.8 L/100km | 11.2 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 16.8 L/100km | 13.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 13.1 L/100km | 12.4 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 64 L | 81 L |
