2009 Audi A5 vs. 2006 Cadillac STS-V
To start off, 2009 Audi A5 is newer by 3 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2006 Cadillac STS-V. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2006 Cadillac STS-V would be higher. At 4,376 cc (8 cylinders), 2006 Cadillac STS-V is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Cadillac STS-V (440 HP @ 6400 RPM) has 175 more horse power than 2009 Audi A5. (265 HP @ 6500 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2006 Cadillac STS-V should accelerate faster than 2009 Audi A5.
Because 2009 Audi A5 is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2006 Cadillac STS-V. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2009 Audi A5 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, 2006 Cadillac STS-V (584 Nm @ 3600 RPM) has 254 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Audi A5. (330 Nm @ 3250 RPM). This means 2006 Cadillac STS-V will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Audi A5.
Compare all specifications:
| 2009 Audi A5 | 2006 Cadillac STS-V | |
| Make | Audi | Cadillac |
| Model | A5 | STS-V |
| Year Released | 2009 | 2006 |
| Body Type | Coupe | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3197 cc | 4376 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Horse Power | 265 HP | 440 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6500 RPM | 6400 RPM |
| Torque | 330 Nm | 584 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3250 RPM | 3600 RPM |
| Drive Type | 4WD | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4630 mm | 4990 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1990 mm | 1850 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1380 mm | 1480 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2760 mm | 2960 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 9.1 L/100km | 11.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 13.8 L/100km | 16.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 11.8 L/100km | 13.1 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 64 L | 64 L |
