2009 Cadillac CTS vs. 2003 Chrysler Sebring
To start off, 2009 Cadillac CTS is newer by 6 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2003 Chrysler Sebring. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2003 Chrysler Sebring would be higher. At 5,664 cc (8 cylinders), 2009 Cadillac CTS is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2009 Cadillac CTS weights approximately 365 kg more than 2003 Chrysler Sebring.
Because 2009 Cadillac CTS 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 2009 Cadillac CTS. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2003 Chrysler Sebring, 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.
Compare all specifications:
| 2009 Cadillac CTS | 2003 Chrysler Sebring | |
| Make | Cadillac | Chrysler |
| Model | CTS | Sebring |
| Year Released | 2009 | 2003 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Coupe |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 5664 cc | 2425 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 395 HP | 0 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline - Premium | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1745 kg | 1380 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4870 mm | 4840 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1800 mm | 1800 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1460 mm | 1370 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2890 mm | 2640 mm |
