2008 Cadillac CTS vs. 2009 Mazda 6
To start off, 2009 Mazda 6 is newer by 1 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2008 Cadillac CTS. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2008 Cadillac CTS would be higher. At 3,600 cc (6 cylinders), 2008 Cadillac CTS is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2008 Cadillac CTS (263 HP @ 6400 RPM) has 95 more horse power than 2009 Mazda 6. (168 HP @ 6000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2008 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 2009 Mazda 6.
Because 2008 Cadillac CTS 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 2008 Cadillac CTS. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2009 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, 2008 Cadillac CTS (343 Nm @ 3100 RPM) has 176 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Mazda 6. (167 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 2008 Cadillac CTS will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Mazda 6.
Compare all specifications:
2008 Cadillac CTS | 2009 Mazda 6 | |
Make | Cadillac | Mazda |
Model | CTS | 6 |
Year Released | 2008 | 2009 |
Body Type | Sedan | Sedan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3600 cc | 2487 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 263 HP | 168 HP |
Engine RPM | 6400 RPM | 6000 RPM |
Torque | 343 Nm | 167 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3100 RPM | 4000 RPM |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Width | 1850 mm | 1850 mm |
Fuel Consumption Highway | 9.4 L/100km | 8.1 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 14.7 L/100km | 11.8 L/100km |