2009 BMW X5 vs. 2006 Cadillac STS-V
To start off, 2009 BMW X5 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 4,799 cc (8 cylinders), 2009 BMW X5 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Cadillac STS-V (440 HP @ 6400 RPM) has 90 more horse power than 2009 BMW X5. (350 HP @ 6300 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2006 Cadillac STS-V should accelerate faster than 2009 BMW X5.
Because 2009 BMW X5 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 BMW X5 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 109 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 BMW X5. (475 Nm @ 3400 RPM). This means 2006 Cadillac STS-V will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 BMW X5.
Compare all specifications:
2009 BMW X5 | 2006 Cadillac STS-V | |
Make | BMW | Cadillac |
Model | X5 | STS-V |
Year Released | 2009 | 2006 |
Body Type | SUV | Sedan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 4799 cc | 4376 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Horse Power | 350 HP | 440 HP |
Engine RPM | 6300 RPM | 6400 RPM |
Torque | 475 Nm | 584 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3400 RPM | 3600 RPM |
Drive Type | 4WD | Rear |
Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 5 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4860 mm | 4990 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1940 mm | 1850 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1770 mm | 1480 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2940 mm | 2960 mm |
Fuel Consumption Highway | 12.4 L/100km | 11.8 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 16.8 L/100km | 16.8 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 14.7 L/100km | 13.1 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 85 L | 64 L |