2007 Cadillac STS-V vs. 2005 Mazda 6
To start off, 2007 Cadillac STS-V is newer by 2 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2005 Mazda 6. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2005 Mazda 6 would be higher. At 4,376 cc (8 cylinders), 2007 Cadillac STS-V is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2007 Cadillac STS-V (469 HP @ 6400 RPM) has 309 more horse power than 2005 Mazda 6. (160 HP @ 6500 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2007 Cadillac STS-V should accelerate faster than 2005 Mazda 6.
Because 2007 Cadillac STS-V 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 2007 Cadillac STS-V. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2005 Mazda 6, 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, 2007 Cadillac STS-V (595 Nm) has 365 more torque (in Nm) than 2005 Mazda 6. (230 Nm). This means 2007 Cadillac STS-V will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2005 Mazda 6.
Compare all specifications:
2007 Cadillac STS-V | 2005 Mazda 6 | |
Make | Cadillac | Mazda |
Model | STS-V | 6 |
Year Released | 2007 | 2005 |
Body Type | Sedan | Sedan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 4376 cc | 2261 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 469 HP | 160 HP |
Engine RPM | 6400 RPM | 6500 RPM |
Torque | 595 Nm | 230 Nm |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Length | 5030 mm | 4750 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1850 mm | 1790 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1480 mm | 1450 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2960 mm | 2680 mm |
Fuel Consumption Highway | 11.2 L/100km | 8.4 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 16.8 L/100km | 10.2 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 64 L | 68 L |