2009 Cadillac SRX vs. 2006 Ford Ranger
To start off, 2009 Cadillac SRX is newer by 3 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2006 Ford Ranger. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2006 Ford Ranger 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 103 more horse power than 2006 Ford Ranger. (149 HP @ 4900 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2009 Cadillac SRX should accelerate faster than 2006 Ford Ranger.
Because 2006 Ford Ranger is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2009 Cadillac SRX. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2006 Ford Ranger 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 SRX (254 Nm @ 2800 RPM) has 10 more torque (in Nm) than 2006 Ford Ranger. (244 Nm @ 3950 RPM). This means 2009 Cadillac SRX will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2006 Ford Ranger.
Compare all specifications:
2009 Cadillac SRX | 2006 Ford Ranger | |
Make | Cadillac | Ford |
Model | SRX | Ranger |
Year Released | 2009 | 2006 |
Body Type | SUV | Pickup |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3564 cc | 2983 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
Horse Power | 252 HP | 149 HP |
Engine RPM | 6500 RPM | 4900 RPM |
Torque | 254 Nm | 244 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2800 RPM | 3950 RPM |
Engine Compression Ratio | 10.2:1 | 8.5:1 |
Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 3 seats |
Number of Doors | 5 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Width | 1850 mm | 1790 mm |
Fuel Consumption | 10.7 L/100km | 11.2 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 15.7 L/100km | 13.8 L/100km |