2009 Cadillac STS vs. 2007 Chrysler Aspen
To start off, 2009 Cadillac STS is newer by 2 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2007 Chrysler Aspen. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2007 Chrysler Aspen would be higher. At 4,701 cc (8 cylinders), 2007 Chrysler Aspen is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Cadillac STS (302 HP @ 6300 RPM) has 67 more horse power than 2007 Chrysler Aspen. (235 HP @ 4600 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2009 Cadillac STS should accelerate faster than 2007 Chrysler Aspen.
Both vehicles are rear wheel drive (RWD) - it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, both vehicles do the job better than front wheel drive vehicles. 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, 2007 Chrysler Aspen (407 Nm @ 3600 RPM) has 38 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Cadillac STS. (369 Nm @ 5200 RPM). This means 2007 Chrysler Aspen will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Cadillac STS.
Compare all specifications:
| 2009 Cadillac STS | 2007 Chrysler Aspen | |
| Make | Cadillac | Chrysler |
| Model | STS | Aspen |
| Year Released | 2009 | 2007 |
| Body Type | Sedan | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3600 cc | 4701 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 302 HP | 235 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6300 RPM | 4600 RPM |
| Torque | 369 Nm | 407 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 5200 RPM | 3600 RPM |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 7 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 5000 mm | 5110 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1850 mm | 1940 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1470 mm | 1890 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2960 mm | 3030 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 9.2 L/100km | 12.4 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 14 L/100km | 16.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 11.9 L/100km | 14.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 64 L | 102 L |
