2006 Cadillac STS vs. 2008 Land Rover Range Rover
To start off, 2008 Land Rover Range Rover is newer by 2 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2006 Cadillac STS. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2006 Cadillac STS would be higher. At 4,556 cc (8 cylinders), 2006 Cadillac STS is equipped with a bigger engine.
Because 2008 Land Rover Range Rover is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2006 Cadillac STS. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2008 Land Rover Range Rover 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, 2008 Land Rover Range Rover (640 Nm @ 2000 RPM) has 212 more torque (in Nm) than 2006 Cadillac STS. (428 Nm @ 4400 RPM). This means 2008 Land Rover Range Rover will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2006 Cadillac STS.
Compare all specifications:
| 2006 Cadillac STS | 2008 Land Rover Range Rover | |
| Make | Cadillac | Land Rover |
| Model | STS | Range Rover |
| Year Released | 2006 | 2008 |
| Body Type | Sedan | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4556 cc | 3628 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 320 HP | 0 HP |
| Torque | 428 Nm | 640 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4400 RPM | 2000 RPM |
| Engine Bore Size | 93 mm | 81 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 84 mm | 88 mm |
| Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4990 mm | 4980 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1470 mm | 1820 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2960 mm | 2890 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 64 L | 105 L |
