2009 Cadillac SRX vs. 2004 Mazda 6
To start off, 2009 Cadillac SRX is newer by 5 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Mazda 6. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Mazda 6 would be higher. At 3,564 cc (6 cylinders), 2009 Cadillac SRX is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Cadillac SRX (252 HP @ 6500 RPM) has 32 more horse power than 2004 Mazda 6. (220 HP @ 4000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2009 Cadillac SRX should accelerate faster than 2004 Mazda 6.
Because 2009 Cadillac SRX 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 SRX. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2004 Mazda 6, 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, 2004 Mazda 6 (260 Nm) has 6 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Cadillac SRX. (254 Nm). This means 2004 Mazda 6 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Cadillac SRX.
Compare all specifications:
2009 Cadillac SRX | 2004 Mazda 6 | |
Make | Cadillac | Mazda |
Model | SRX | 6 |
Year Released | 2009 | 2004 |
Body Type | SUV | Sedan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3564 cc | 2964 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 252 HP | 220 HP |
Engine RPM | 6500 RPM | 4000 RPM |
Torque | 254 Nm | 260 Nm |
Engine Compression Ratio | 10.2:1 | 10.0:1 |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 5 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Width | 1850 mm | 1790 mm |
Fuel Consumption Highway | 10.7 L/100km | 9.1 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 15.7 L/100km | 12.4 L/100km |