2007 Cadillac STS-V vs. 2009 Mercury Mariner
To start off, 2009 Mercury Mariner is newer by 2 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2007 Cadillac STS-V. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2007 Cadillac STS-V 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 316 more horse power than 2009 Mercury Mariner. (153 HP @ 6000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2007 Cadillac STS-V should accelerate faster than 2009 Mercury Mariner.
Because 2009 Mercury Mariner is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2007 Cadillac STS-V. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2009 Mercury Mariner 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, 2007 Cadillac STS-V (595 Nm @ 3900 RPM) has 411 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Mercury Mariner. (184 Nm @ 4500 RPM). This means 2007 Cadillac STS-V will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Mercury Mariner.
Compare all specifications:
| 2007 Cadillac STS-V | 2009 Mercury Mariner | |
| Make | Cadillac | Mercury |
| Model | STS-V | Mariner |
| Year Released | 2007 | 2009 |
| Body Type | Sedan | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4376 cc | 2488 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 469 HP | 153 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6400 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Torque | 595 Nm | 184 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3900 RPM | 4500 RPM |
| Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 5030 mm | 4440 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1850 mm | 1810 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1480 mm | 1730 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2960 mm | 2630 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 11.2 L/100km | 8.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 16.8 L/100km | 8.1 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 64 L | 57 L |
