2009 Cadillac STS vs. 2012 Lexus RX
To start off, 2012 Lexus RX is newer by 3 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2009 Cadillac STS. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2009 Cadillac STS would be higher. At 3,599 cc (6 cylinders), 2009 Cadillac STS is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Cadillac STS (302 HP @ 6300 RPM) has 7 more horse power than 2012 Lexus RX. (295 HP @ 6000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2009 Cadillac STS should accelerate faster than 2012 Lexus RX. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2012 Lexus RX weights approximately 415 kg more than 2009 Cadillac STS.
Because 2009 Cadillac STS 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 STS. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2012 Lexus RX, 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.
Compare all specifications:
| 2009 Cadillac STS | 2012 Lexus RX | |
| Make | Cadillac | Lexus |
| Model | STS | RX |
| Year Released | 2009 | 2012 |
| Body Type | Sedan | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3599 cc | 3500 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 302 HP | 295 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6300 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | CVT |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1635 kg | 2050 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5000 mm | 4770 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1850 mm | 1885 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1470 mm | 1684 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2960 mm | 2741 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 9.1 L/100km | 8.4 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 13.8 L/100km | 7.4 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 64 L | 65 L |
