2009 Cadillac DTS vs. 2006 Mercury Mariner
To start off, 2009 Cadillac DTS is newer by 3 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2006 Mercury Mariner. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2006 Mercury Mariner would be higher. At 4,565 cc (8 cylinders), 2009 Cadillac DTS is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2006 Mercury Mariner weights approximately 290 kg more than 2009 Cadillac DTS.
Because 2006 Mercury Mariner is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2009 Cadillac DTS. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2006 Mercury Mariner 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, 2009 Cadillac DTS (400 Nm @ 4400 RPM) has 232 more torque (in Nm) than 2006 Mercury Mariner. (168 Nm @ 4250 RPM). This means 2009 Cadillac DTS will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2006 Mercury Mariner.
Compare all specifications:
| 2009 Cadillac DTS | 2006 Mercury Mariner | |
| Make | Cadillac | Mercury |
| Model | DTS | Mariner |
| Year Released | 2009 | 2006 |
| Body Type | Sedan | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4565 cc | 2299 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 276 HP | 0 HP |
| Torque | 400 Nm | 168 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4400 RPM | 4250 RPM |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 9.0:1 | 12.3:1 |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline / Electric Hybrid |
| Drive Type | Front | 4WD |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1635 kg | 1925 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5280 mm | 4430 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1910 mm | 1790 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1470 mm | 1790 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2940 mm | 2630 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 10.2 L/100km | 8.1 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 15.7 L/100km | 7.1 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 13.1 L/100km | 7.6 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 68 L | 57 L |
