2006 Mitsubishi Raider vs. 2013 Cadillac CTS
To start off, 2013 Cadillac CTS is newer by 7 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2006 Mitsubishi Raider. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2006 Mitsubishi Raider would be higher. At 3,704 cc (6 cylinders), 2006 Mitsubishi Raider is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2013 Cadillac CTS (314 HP @ 6800 RPM) has 103 more horse power than 2006 Mitsubishi Raider. (211 HP @ 5200 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2013 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 2006 Mitsubishi Raider.
Let's talk about torque, 2013 Cadillac CTS (373 Nm @ 4900 RPM) has 54 more torque (in Nm) than 2006 Mitsubishi Raider. (319 Nm @ 3600 RPM). This means 2013 Cadillac CTS will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2006 Mitsubishi Raider.
Compare all specifications:
2006 Mitsubishi Raider | 2013 Cadillac CTS | |
Make | Mitsubishi | Cadillac |
Model | Raider | CTS |
Year Released | 2006 | 2013 |
Body Type | Pickup | Coupe |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3704 cc | 3600 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Horse Power | 211 HP | 314 HP |
Engine RPM | 5200 RPM | 6800 RPM |
Torque | 319 Nm | 373 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3600 RPM | 4900 RPM |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Length | 5590 mm | 4788 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1830 mm | 1882 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1750 mm | 1442 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3340 mm | 2880 mm |
Fuel Consumption Highway | 10.7 L/100km | 8.7 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 14.7 L/100km | 13 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 13.1 L/100km | 11.2 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 83 L | 68 L |