2009 Mazda 3 vs. 2013 Cadillac CTS-V
To start off, 2013 Cadillac CTS-V is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2009 Mazda 3. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2009 Mazda 3 would be higher. At 6,200 cc (8 cylinders), 2013 Cadillac CTS-V is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2013 Cadillac CTS-V (548 HP @ 6100 RPM) has 403 more horse power than 2009 Mazda 3. (145 HP @ 6500 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2013 Cadillac CTS-V should accelerate faster than 2009 Mazda 3. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2013 Cadillac CTS-V weights approximately 752 kg more than 2009 Mazda 3. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 2013 Cadillac CTS-V 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 2013 Cadillac CTS-V. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2009 Mazda 3, 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, 2013 Cadillac CTS-V (747 Nm @ 3800 RPM) has 566 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Mazda 3. (181 Nm @ 4500 RPM). This means 2013 Cadillac CTS-V will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Mazda 3.
Compare all specifications:
| 2009 Mazda 3 | 2013 Cadillac CTS-V | |
| Make | Mazda | Cadillac |
| Model | 3 | CTS-V |
| Year Released | 2009 | 2013 |
| Body Type | Hatchback | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1998 cc | 6200 cc |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 145 HP | 548 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6500 RPM | 6100 RPM |
| Torque | 181 Nm | 747 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4500 RPM | 3800 RPM |
| Engine Bore Size | 87.5 mm | 103 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 83.1 mm | 92 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 10.0:1 | 9.1 |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | 6-speed manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1242 kg | 1994 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4500 mm | 4877 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1760 mm | 1884 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1470 mm | 1422 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2650 mm | 2880 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 10.6 L/100km | 14.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 55 L | 68 L |
