2010 Tata Nano vs. 2013 Cadillac CTS
To start off, 2013 Cadillac CTS is newer by 3 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2010 Tata Nano. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2010 Tata Nano 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 279 more horse power than 2010 Tata Nano. (35 HP @ 5250 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2013 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 2010 Tata Nano. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2013 Cadillac CTS weights approximately 1257 kg more than 2010 Tata Nano. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
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, 2013 Cadillac CTS (373 Nm @ 4900 RPM) has 325 more torque (in Nm) than 2010 Tata Nano. (48 Nm @ 3000 RPM). This means 2013 Cadillac CTS will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2010 Tata Nano. 2013 Cadillac CTS has automatic transmission and 2010 Tata Nano has manual transmission. 2010 Tata Nano 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:
| 2010 Tata Nano | 2013 Cadillac CTS | |
| Make | Tata | Cadillac |
| Model | Nano | CTS |
| Year Released | 2010 | 2013 |
| Body Type | Hatchback | Station Wagon |
| Engine Position | Rear | Front |
| Engine Size | 624 cc | 3600 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 2 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 35 HP | 314 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5250 RPM | 6800 RPM |
| Torque | 48 Nm | 373 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3000 RPM | 4900 RPM |
| Engine Bore Size | 73.5 mm | 89 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 73.5 mm | 80 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 9.5:1 | 11.7 |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | 6-speed automatic |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 600 kg | 1857 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 3099 mm | 4877 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1495 mm | 1842 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1652 mm | 1473 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2230 mm | 2880 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 4.2 L/100km | 10.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 37 L | 68 L |
