2008 Chrysler 300 vs. 2013 Cadillac CTS
To start off, 2013 Cadillac CTS is newer by 5 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2008 Chrysler 300. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2008 Chrysler 300 would be higher. At 3,000 cc (6 cylinders), 2013 Cadillac CTS is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2013 Cadillac CTS (266 HP @ 7000 RPM) has 76 more horse power than 2008 Chrysler 300. (190 HP @ 6400 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2013 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 2008 Chrysler 300.
Let's talk about torque, 2013 Cadillac CTS (302 Nm @ 5700 RPM) has 44 more torque (in Nm) than 2008 Chrysler 300. (258 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 2013 Cadillac CTS will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2008 Chrysler 300.
Compare all specifications:
2008 Chrysler 300 | 2013 Cadillac CTS | |
Make | Chrysler | Cadillac |
Model | 300 | CTS |
Year Released | 2008 | 2013 |
Body Type | Sedan | Station Wagon |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2736 cc | 3000 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 190 HP | 266 HP |
Engine RPM | 6400 RPM | 7000 RPM |
Torque | 258 Nm | 302 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4000 RPM | 5700 RPM |
Transmission Type | Automatic | 6-speed automatic |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Length | 5010 mm | 4877 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1890 mm | 1842 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1490 mm | 1473 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3050 mm | 2880 mm |
Fuel Consumption Highway | 9.1 L/100km | 9 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 13.1 L/100km | 13 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 11.2 L/100km | 11.2 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 68 L | 68 L |