2009 Volkswagen Polo vs. 2013 Cadillac ESCALADE
To start off, 2013 Cadillac ESCALADE is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2009 Volkswagen Polo. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2009 Volkswagen Polo would be higher. At 6,200 cc (8 cylinders), 2013 Cadillac ESCALADE is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2013 Cadillac ESCALADE (397 HP @ 5700 RPM) has 283 more horse power than 2009 Volkswagen Polo. (114 HP @ 5200 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2013 Cadillac ESCALADE should accelerate faster than 2009 Volkswagen Polo. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2013 Cadillac ESCALADE weights approximately 1370 kg more than 2009 Volkswagen Polo. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 2013 Cadillac ESCALADE is all wheel drive (AWD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2009 Volkswagen Polo. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2013 Cadillac ESCALADE 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, 2013 Cadillac ESCALADE (565 Nm @ 4300 RPM) has 480 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Volkswagen Polo. (85 Nm @ 2400 RPM). This means 2013 Cadillac ESCALADE will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Volkswagen Polo. 2013 Cadillac ESCALADE has automatic transmission and 2009 Volkswagen Polo has manual transmission. 2009 Volkswagen Polo will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2013 Cadillac ESCALADE will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 2009 Volkswagen Polo | 2013 Cadillac ESCALADE | |
| Make | Volkswagen | Cadillac |
| Model | Polo | ESCALADE |
| Year Released | 2009 | 2013 |
| Body Type | Hatchback | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1984 cc | 6200 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 114 HP | 397 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5200 RPM | 5700 RPM |
| Torque | 85 Nm | 565 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2400 RPM | 4300 RPM |
| Engine Bore Size | 82.5 mm | 103 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 92.8 mm | 92 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 10.5:1 | 10.4 |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Front | AWD |
| Transmission Type | Manual | 6-speed automatic |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 7 seats |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1224 kg | 2594 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 3920 mm | 5144 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1660 mm | 2007 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1470 mm | 1928 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2470 mm | 2947 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 7.6 L/100km | 15.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 45 L | 98 L |
