2006 Ford Mustang vs. 2013 Cadillac XTS
To start off, 2013 Cadillac XTS is newer by 7 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2006 Ford Mustang. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2006 Ford Mustang would be higher. At 4,604 cc (8 cylinders), 2006 Ford Mustang is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2013 Cadillac XTS (314 HP @ 6800 RPM) has 14 more horse power than 2006 Ford Mustang. (300 HP @ 5750 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2013 Cadillac XTS should accelerate faster than 2006 Ford Mustang. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2006 Ford Mustang weights approximately 1039 kg more than 2013 Cadillac XTS.
Because 2006 Ford Mustang 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 Ford Mustang. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2013 Cadillac XTS, 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 Ford Mustang (434 Nm @ 4500 RPM) has 76 more torque (in Nm) than 2013 Cadillac XTS. (358 Nm @ 5200 RPM). This means 2006 Ford Mustang will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2013 Cadillac XTS.
Compare all specifications:
| 2006 Ford Mustang | 2013 Cadillac XTS | |
| Make | Ford | Cadillac |
| Model | Mustang | XTS |
| Year Released | 2006 | 2013 |
| Body Type | Convertible | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4604 cc | 3564 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 300 HP | 314 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5750 RPM | 6800 RPM |
| Torque | 434 Nm | 358 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4500 RPM | 5200 RPM |
| Engine Bore Size | 90.2 mm | 94 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 90 mm | 86 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 10.1:1 | 11.5 |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 2856 kg | 1817 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4770 mm | 5131 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1890 mm | 1852 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1390 mm | 1510 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2730 mm | 2837 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 9.4 L/100km | 8.4 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 13.8 L/100km | 13.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 11.8 L/100km | 11.2 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 61 L | 72 L |
