2009 Cadillac STS vs. 2006 Cadillac STS-V
To start off, 2009 Cadillac STS is newer by 3 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2006 Cadillac STS-V. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2006 Cadillac STS-V would be higher. At 4,565 cc (8 cylinders), 2009 Cadillac STS is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Cadillac STS-V (440 HP @ 6400 RPM) has 119 more horse power than 2009 Cadillac STS. (321 HP @ 6400 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2006 Cadillac STS-V should accelerate faster than 2009 Cadillac STS.
Because 2009 Cadillac STS is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2006 Cadillac STS-V. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2009 Cadillac STS 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, 2006 Cadillac STS-V (584 Nm @ 3600 RPM) has 157 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Cadillac STS. (427 Nm @ 4400 RPM). This means 2006 Cadillac STS-V will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Cadillac STS.
Compare all specifications:
2009 Cadillac STS | 2006 Cadillac STS-V | |
Make | Cadillac | Cadillac |
Model | STS | STS-V |
Year Released | 2009 | 2006 |
Body Type | Sedan | Sedan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 4565 cc | 4376 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Horse Power | 321 HP | 440 HP |
Engine RPM | 6400 RPM | 6400 RPM |
Torque | 427 Nm | 584 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4400 RPM | 3600 RPM |
Drive Type | 4WD | Rear |
Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4990 mm | 4990 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1850 mm | 1850 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1470 mm | 1480 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2960 mm | 2960 mm |
Fuel Consumption | 9.1 L/100km | 11.8 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 13.8 L/100km | 16.8 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 16.8 L/100km | 13.1 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 66 L | 64 L |