Currently, most of the Navier-Stokes equation based Computational Fluid Dynamic solvers rely heavily on the robustness of unstructured finite volume discretization to solve complex flows. Widely used finite volume solvers are restricted to second order spatial accuracy while structured finite difference codes can easily resolve up to five orders of spatial discretization and beyond. In order to solve flow around complicated geometries, unstructured finite volume codes are employed to avoid tedious and time consuming handmade structured meshes. By using overset grids and NASA's overset grid solver, Overflow, structured finite difference solutions are achievable for complex geometries such as the DrivAer  model. This allows for higher order flow structures to be captured as compared to traditional finite volume schemes. The current paper compares flow field solutions computed with finite volume and finite difference methods to experimental results of the DrivAer model .