2009 Suzuki SX4 vs. 2013 Cadillac CTS
To start off, 2013 Cadillac CTS is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2009 Suzuki SX4. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2009 Suzuki SX4 would be higher. At 3,600 cc (6 cylinders), 2013 Cadillac CTS is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2013 Cadillac CTS (314 HP @ 6800 RPM) has 171 more horse power than 2009 Suzuki SX4. (143 HP @ 5800 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2013 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 2009 Suzuki SX4. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2013 Cadillac CTS weights approximately 483 kg more than 2009 Suzuki SX4. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 2013 Cadillac CTS 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. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2009 Suzuki SX4, 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 (373 Nm @ 4900 RPM) has 189 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Suzuki SX4. (184 Nm @ 3500 RPM). This means 2013 Cadillac CTS will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Suzuki SX4. 2013 Cadillac CTS has automatic transmission and 2009 Suzuki SX4 has manual transmission. 2009 Suzuki SX4 will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2013 Cadillac CTS will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 2009 Suzuki SX4 | 2013 Cadillac CTS | |
| Make | Suzuki | Cadillac |
| Model | SX4 | CTS |
| Year Released | 2009 | 2013 |
| Body Type | Hatchback | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1995 cc | 3600 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 143 HP | 314 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5800 RPM | 6800 RPM |
| Torque | 184 Nm | 373 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3500 RPM | 4900 RPM |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 9.5:1 | 11.3 |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | 6-speed automatic |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1295 kg | 1778 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4520 mm | 4859 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1740 mm | 1842 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1550 mm | 1473 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2510 mm | 2880 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 8.1 L/100km | 8.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 10.7 L/100km | 13 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 9.8 L/100km | 11.2 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 50 L | 68 L |
