2009 Cadillac SRX vs. 2008 Saturn Aura
To start off, 2009 Cadillac SRX is newer by 1 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2008 Saturn Aura. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2008 Saturn Aura 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 88 more horse power than 2008 Saturn Aura. (164 HP @ 6400 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2009 Cadillac SRX should accelerate faster than 2008 Saturn Aura.
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, 2008 Saturn Aura, 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, 2009 Cadillac SRX (254 Nm @ 2800 RPM) has 38 more torque (in Nm) than 2008 Saturn Aura. (216 Nm @ 5000 RPM). This means 2009 Cadillac SRX will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2008 Saturn Aura.
Compare all specifications:
| 2009 Cadillac SRX | 2008 Saturn Aura | |
| Make | Cadillac | Saturn |
| Model | SRX | Aura |
| Year Released | 2009 | 2008 |
| Body Type | SUV | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3564 cc | 2393 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 252 HP | 164 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6500 RPM | 6400 RPM |
| Torque | 254 Nm | 216 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2800 RPM | 5000 RPM |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
| 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 | 7.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 15.7 L/100km | 10.7 L/100km |
