2006 Ford Ranger vs. 2003 Cadillac CTS
To start off, 2006 Ford Ranger is newer by 3 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2003 Cadillac CTS. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2003 Cadillac CTS would be higher. At 2,597 cc (6 cylinders), 2003 Cadillac CTS is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2003 Cadillac CTS (179 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 71 more horse power than 2006 Ford Ranger. (108 HP @ 6000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2003 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 2006 Ford Ranger. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2003 Cadillac CTS weights approximately 376 kg more than 2006 Ford Ranger. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Both vehicles are rear wheel drive (RWD) - it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, both vehicles do the job better than front 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 Ford Ranger (367 Nm @ 3500 RPM) has 122 more torque (in Nm) than 2003 Cadillac CTS. (245 Nm @ 3400 RPM). This means 2006 Ford Ranger will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2003 Cadillac CTS.
Compare all specifications:
2006 Ford Ranger | 2003 Cadillac CTS | |
Make | Ford | Cadillac |
Model | Ranger | CTS |
Year Released | 2006 | 2003 |
Body Type | Pickup | Sedan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2499 cc | 2597 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 108 HP | 179 HP |
Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 6000 RPM |
Torque | 367 Nm | 245 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3500 RPM | 3400 RPM |
Engine Bore Size | 90 mm | 83.3 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 94.6 mm | 79.6 mm |
Engine Compression Ratio | 11.0:1 | 10.2:1 |
Fuel Type | Diesel | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1244 kg | 1620 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4660 mm | 4840 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1350 mm | 1450 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3010 mm | 2890 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 85 L | 64 L |