2009 BMW M3 vs. 2004 Cadillac CTS
To start off, 2009 BMW M3 is newer by 5 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Cadillac CTS. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Cadillac CTS would be higher. At 3,999 cc (8 cylinders), 2009 BMW M3 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 BMW M3 (414 HP @ 8300 RPM) has 199 more horse power than 2004 Cadillac CTS. (215 HP @ 6000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2009 BMW M3 should accelerate faster than 2004 Cadillac CTS.
Both vehicles are rear wheel drive (RWD) - it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, both vehicles do the job better than front wheel drive vehicles. 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, 2004 Cadillac CTS (300 Nm @ 3400 RPM) has 5 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 BMW M3. (295 Nm @ 3900 RPM). This means 2004 Cadillac CTS will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 BMW M3.
Compare all specifications:
2009 BMW M3 | 2004 Cadillac CTS | |
Make | BMW | Cadillac |
Model | M3 | CTS |
Year Released | 2009 | 2004 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3999 cc | 3173 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 414 HP | 215 HP |
Engine RPM | 8300 RPM | 6000 RPM |
Torque | 295 Nm | 300 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3900 RPM | 3400 RPM |
Engine Compression Ratio | 12.0:1 | 10.0:1 |
Top Speed | 249 km/hour | 238 km/hour |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
Vehicle Length | 4590 mm | 4830 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1820 mm | 1800 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1450 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2770 mm | 2750 mm |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 14.9 L/100km | 11 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 63 L | 68 L |