2009 Cadillac CTS vs. 2006 Ford Mustang
To start off, 2009 Cadillac CTS is newer by 3 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2006 Ford Mustang. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2006 Ford Mustang would be higher. At 4,604 cc (8 cylinders), 2006 Ford Mustang is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Cadillac CTS (304 HP @ 6400 RPM) has 4 more horse power than 2006 Ford Mustang. (300 HP @ 5750 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2009 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 2006 Ford Mustang. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2006 Ford Mustang weights approximately 1066 kg more than 2009 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, 2006 Ford Mustang (434 Nm @ 4500 RPM) has 64 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Cadillac CTS. (370 Nm @ 5200 RPM). This means 2006 Ford Mustang will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Cadillac CTS.
Compare all specifications:
| 2009 Cadillac CTS | 2006 Ford Mustang | |
| Make | Cadillac | Ford |
| Model | CTS | Mustang |
| Year Released | 2009 | 2006 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Convertible |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3599 cc | 4604 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 304 HP | 300 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6400 RPM | 5750 RPM |
| Torque | 370 Nm | 434 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 5200 RPM | 4500 RPM |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 10.2:1 | 10.1:1 |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1790 kg | 2856 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4870 mm | 4770 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1850 mm | 1890 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1480 mm | 1390 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2890 mm | 2730 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 9.1 L/100km | 9.4 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 13.8 L/100km | 13.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 11.8 L/100km | 11.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 68 L | 61 L |
