2009 Cadillac STS-V vs. 2004 Mercury Sable
To start off, 2009 Cadillac STS-V is newer by 5 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Mercury Sable. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Mercury Sable would be higher. At 4,376 cc (8 cylinders), 2009 Cadillac STS-V is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Cadillac STS-V (469 HP) has 314 more horse power than 2004 Mercury Sable. (155 HP). In normal driving conditions, 2009 Cadillac STS-V should accelerate faster than 2004 Mercury Sable.
Let's talk about torque, 2009 Cadillac STS-V (595 Nm) has 344 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 Mercury Sable. (251 Nm). This means 2009 Cadillac STS-V will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 Mercury Sable.
Compare all specifications:
2009 Cadillac STS-V | 2004 Mercury Sable | |
Make | Cadillac | Mercury |
Model | STS-V | Sable |
Year Released | 2009 | 2004 |
Body Type | Sedan | Sedan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 4376 cc | 2983 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
Horse Power | 469 HP | 155 HP |
Torque | 595 Nm | 251 Nm |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 6 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Length | 5030 mm | 5080 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1850 mm | 1860 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1480 mm | 1420 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2960 mm | 2760 mm |
Fuel Consumption Highway | 12.4 L/100km | 9.2 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 18.1 L/100km | 12.5 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 15.7 L/100km | 10.8 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 64 L | 68 L |