2006 Mazda 3 vs. 2013 Cadillac ESCALADE
To start off, 2013 Cadillac ESCALADE is newer by 7 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2006 Mazda 3. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2006 Mazda 3 would be higher. At 6,200 cc (8 cylinders), 2013 Cadillac ESCALADE is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2013 Cadillac ESCALADE (397 HP @ 5700 RPM) has 247 more horse power than 2006 Mazda 3. (150 HP @ 6500 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2013 Cadillac ESCALADE should accelerate faster than 2006 Mazda 3.
Because 2013 Cadillac ESCALADE is all wheel drive (AWD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2006 Mazda 3. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2013 Cadillac ESCALADE 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, 2013 Cadillac ESCALADE (565 Nm @ 4300 RPM) has 382 more torque (in Nm) than 2006 Mazda 3. (183 Nm @ 4500 RPM). This means 2013 Cadillac ESCALADE will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2006 Mazda 3.
Compare all specifications:
2006 Mazda 3 | 2013 Cadillac ESCALADE | |
Make | Mazda | Cadillac |
Model | 3 | ESCALADE |
Year Released | 2006 | 2013 |
Body Type | Sedan | SUV |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1999 cc | 6200 cc |
Horse Power | 150 HP | 397 HP |
Engine RPM | 6500 RPM | 5700 RPM |
Torque | 183 Nm | 565 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4500 RPM | 4300 RPM |
Drive Type | Front | AWD |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4540 mm | 5639 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1760 mm | 2009 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1470 mm | 1892 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2650 mm | 3302 mm |
Fuel Consumption | 6.7 L/100km | 13 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 8.4 L/100km | 18 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 7.6 L/100km | 16.8 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 55 L | 117 L |