2009 Cadillac CTS vs. 2013 Jaguar XF
To start off, 2013 Jaguar XF is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2009 Cadillac CTS. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2009 Cadillac CTS would be higher. At 3,564 cc (6 cylinders), 2009 Cadillac CTS is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2013 Jaguar XF (335 HP @ 6500 RPM) has 76 more horse power than 2009 Cadillac CTS. (259 HP @ 6200 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2013 Jaguar XF should accelerate faster than 2009 Cadillac CTS.
Because 2013 Jaguar XF is all wheel drive (AWD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2009 Cadillac CTS. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2013 Jaguar XF 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, 2013 Jaguar XF (340 Nm @ 5000 RPM) has 87 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Cadillac CTS. (253 Nm @ 3100 RPM). This means 2013 Jaguar XF will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Cadillac CTS.
Compare all specifications:
| 2009 Cadillac CTS | 2013 Jaguar XF | |
| Make | Cadillac | Jaguar |
| Model | CTS | XF |
| Year Released | 2009 | 2013 |
| Body Type | Station Wagon | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3564 cc | 2995 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 259 HP | 335 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6200 RPM | 6500 RPM |
| Torque | 253 Nm | 340 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3100 RPM | 5000 RPM |
| Engine Bore Size | 94 mm | 84 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 85 mm | 89 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 10.2:1 | 10.5:1 |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline / Electric Hybrid |
| Drive Type | Rear | AWD |
| Transmission Type | Manual | CVT |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 4 doors |
