2009 Aston Martin DBS vs. 2005 Cadillac Escalade
To start off, 2009 Aston Martin DBS is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2005 Cadillac Escalade. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2005 Cadillac Escalade would be higher. At 5,998 cc (8 cylinders), 2005 Cadillac Escalade is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Aston Martin DBS (503 HP @ 6500 RPM) has 157 more horse power than 2005 Cadillac Escalade. (346 HP @ 6000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2009 Aston Martin DBS should accelerate faster than 2005 Cadillac Escalade.
Because 2005 Cadillac Escalade is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2009 Aston Martin DBS. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2005 Cadillac Escalade 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, 2005 Cadillac Escalade (515 Nm) has 95 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Aston Martin DBS. (420 Nm). This means 2005 Cadillac Escalade will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Aston Martin DBS.
Compare all specifications:
| 2009 Aston Martin DBS | 2005 Cadillac Escalade | |
| Make | Aston Martin | Cadillac |
| Model | DBS | Escalade |
| Year Released | 2009 | 2005 |
| Body Type | Coupe | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 5933 cc | 5998 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 12 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 503 HP | 346 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6500 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Torque | 420 Nm | 515 Nm |
| Engine Bore Size | 89 mm | 102 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 79.5 mm | 92 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 10.9:1 | 10.0:1 |
| Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 7 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Width | 1910 mm | 2010 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 13.1 L/100km | 13.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 19.7 L/100km | 18.1 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 16.9 L/100km | 15.7 L/100km |
