In 2019 Cadillac CT6 horsepower was 550 hp or 405 kW
Cadillac CT6 horsepower to weight ratio in 2019 is shown in the chart.
Cadillac CT6 horsepower to CC ratio is shown in this graph
Vehicle | Power (difference from average) | Power to torque ratio | Power per passenger | Power to 1 cylinder | Power to consumption rate |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Blackwing 4.2 V8 |
550 hp / 405 kw
(+218%) |
+37% | 110 hp / 81 kw | 69 hp / 51 kw | 131 points |
Vehicle | Blackwing 4.2 V8 |
---|---|
Power (difference from average) |
550 hp / 405 kw
(+218%) |
Power to torque ratio | 37 % |
Power per passenger | 110 hp / 81 kw |
Power to 1 cylinder | 69 hp / 51 kw |
Power to consumption rate | 131 points |
In 2019 Cadillac CT6 horsepower was between 335 and 500 hp or 246 and 368 kW.
Cadillac CT6 horsepower to weight ratio in 2019 is shown in the chart.
Cadillac CT6 horsepower to CC ratio is shown in this graph
Vehicle | Power (difference from average) | Power to torque ratio | Power per passenger | Power to 1 cylinder | Power to consumption rate |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
3.6 V6 |
335 hp / 246 kw
(+94%) |
+13% | 67 hp / 49 kw | 56 hp / 41 kw | 93.1 points |
Blackwing 4.2 V8 |
500 hp / 368 kw
(+189%) |
+36% | 100 hp / 74 kw | 63 hp / 46 kw | 119 points |
Vehicle | 3.6 V6 |
---|---|
Power (difference from average) |
335 hp / 246 kw
(+94%) |
Power to torque ratio | 13 % |
Power per passenger | 67 hp / 49 kw |
Power to 1 cylinder | 56 hp / 41 kw |
Power to consumption rate | 93.1 points |
Vehicle | Blackwing 4.2 V8 |
Power (difference from average) |
500 hp / 368 kw
(+189%) |
Power to torque ratio | 36 % |
Power per passenger | 100 hp / 74 kw |
Power to 1 cylinder | 63 hp / 46 kw |
Power to consumption rate | 119 points |
In 2016 Cadillac CT6 horsepower was between 265 and 409 hp or 195 and 301 kW.
Cadillac CT6 horsepower to weight ratio in 2016 is shown in the chart.
Cadillac CT6 horsepower to CC ratio is shown in this graph
Vehicle | Power (difference from average) | Power to torque ratio | Power per passenger | Power to 1 cylinder | Power to consumption rate |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
3.6 V6 |
340 hp / 250 kw
(+97%) |
+12% | 68 hp / 50 kw | 57 hp / 42 kw | 94.4 points |
2.0 |
265 hp / 195 kw
(+53%) |
+34% | 53 hp / 39 kw | 66 hp / 49 kw | 132.5 points |
3.0 V6 |
409 hp / 301 kw
(+136%) |
+25% | 82 hp / 60 kw | 68 hp / 50 kw | 136.3 points |
2.0T LTG |
276 hp / 203 kw
(+60%) |
+31% | 55 hp / 41 kw | 69 hp / 51 kw | 138 points |
Vehicle | 3.6 V6 |
---|---|
Power (difference from average) |
340 hp / 250 kw
(+97%) |
Power to torque ratio | 12 % |
Power per passenger | 68 hp / 50 kw |
Power to 1 cylinder | 57 hp / 42 kw |
Power to consumption rate | 94.4 points |
Vehicle | 2.0 |
Power (difference from average) |
265 hp / 195 kw
(+53%) |
Power to torque ratio | 34 % |
Power per passenger | 53 hp / 39 kw |
Power to 1 cylinder | 66 hp / 49 kw |
Power to consumption rate | 132.5 points |
Vehicle | 3.0 V6 |
Power (difference from average) |
409 hp / 301 kw
(+136%) |
Power to torque ratio | 25 % |
Power per passenger | 82 hp / 60 kw |
Power to 1 cylinder | 68 hp / 50 kw |
Power to consumption rate | 136.3 points |
Vehicle | 2.0T LTG |
Power (difference from average) |
276 hp / 203 kw
(+60%) |
Power to torque ratio | 31 % |
Power per passenger | 55 hp / 41 kw |
Power to 1 cylinder | 69 hp / 51 kw |
Power to consumption rate | 138 points |