2009 Buick Lucerne vs. 2006 Cadillac STS
To start off, 2009 Buick Lucerne is newer by 3 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2006 Cadillac STS. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2006 Cadillac STS would be higher. At 3,879 cc (6 cylinders), 2009 Buick Lucerne is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Cadillac STS (253 HP @ 6500 RPM) has 29 more horse power than 2009 Buick Lucerne. (224 HP @ 5700 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2006 Cadillac STS should accelerate faster than 2009 Buick Lucerne.
Because 2006 Cadillac STS is rear wheel drive (RWD), it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, it will be much easier to do with 2006 Cadillac STS. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2009 Buick Lucerne, being front wheel drive (FWD), will offer much better control with better grip. 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 (342 Nm @ 3200 RPM) has 105 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Buick Lucerne. (237 Nm @ 3200 RPM). This means 2006 Cadillac STS will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Buick Lucerne.
Compare all specifications:
| 2009 Buick Lucerne | 2006 Cadillac STS | |
| Make | Buick | Cadillac |
| Model | Lucerne | STS |
| Year Released | 2009 | 2006 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3879 cc | 3563 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 224 HP | 253 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5700 RPM | 6500 RPM |
| Torque | 237 Nm | 342 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3200 RPM | 3200 RPM |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 9.8:1 | 10.2:1 |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline - Premium |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 6 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Width | 1880 mm | 1850 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 9.1 L/100km | 8.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 13.8 L/100km | 13.1 L/100km |
