Car comparison

Cadillac BLS 2.8 T V6vsAlfa Romeo 159 3.2 JTS V6

Compare specs, acceleration, fuel consumption, dimensions, practicality, and estimated running costs side by side.

New comparison

Cadillac BLS

2.8 T V6

255 hp2792 ccGasolineFWDAutomaticTurbochargedSedan2006-2010
VS

Alfa Romeo 159

3.2 JTS V6

260 hp3195 ccGasolineAWDAutomaticNaturally aspiratedSedan2007-2010

Comparison overview

Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.

Best choices

Cadillac BLS 2.8 T V6

  • Fastest top speed
    245 km/h
    152 mph
  • Highest torque
    365 Nm
    269 lb-ft
  • Lightest
    1,585 kg
    3,494 lb
  • Best power-to-weight
    161 hp/t
    120 kW/t
    6.2 kg/hp
  • Lowest combined fuel consumption
    10.8 L/100 km
    21.8 mpg US
    26.2 mpg UK
  • Lowest city consumption
    16.9 L/100 km
    13.9 mpg US
    16.7 mpg UK
  • Lowest highway consumption
    7.2 L/100 km
    32.7 mpg US
    39.2 mpg UK
  • Lowest CO2 emissions
    259 g/km
  • Largest trunk
    425 L
  • Best overall score
    61/100
  • Best performance score
    56/100
  • Best economy score
    78/100
  • Best practicality score
    72/100

Specification comparison

Specification comparison
ModelCadillacBLS2.8 T V6Alfa Romeo1593.2 JTS V6
Power
255hp190kW
260hp194kW
Torque
365Nm269lb-ft
322Nm237lb-ft
Curb weight
1,585kg3,494lb
1,630kg3,594lb
Gross weight
2,100kg4,630lb
2,180kg4,806lb
Top speed
245 km/h
152 mph
244 km/h
152 mph
To 99% top speed
70.0s99% target: 243 km/h / 151 mph
Calculated
67.1s99% target: 242 km/h / 150 mph
Calculated
0-100 km/h
7.5s
7.2s
0-200 km/h
25.1s
Calculated
24.2s
Calculated
0-60 mph
7.2s
Calculated
6.9s
Calculated
Fuel consumption
10.8L/100 km21.8mpg US26.2mpg UK
12.1L/100 km19.4mpg US23.3mpg UK
Fuel consumption city
16.9L/100 km13.9mpg US16.7mpg UK
18.2L/100 km12.9mpg US15.5mpg UK
Fuel consumption highway
7.2L/100 km32.7mpg US39.2mpg UK
8.5L/100 km27.7mpg US33.2mpg UK
Quarter mile
15.3s
Calculated
15.1s
Calculated
Power-to-weight
161hp/t120kW/t73hp/1000 lb
Calculated
160hp/t119kW/t72hp/1000 lb
Calculated
Torque-to-weight
230Nm/t154lb-ft/ton
Calculated
198Nm/t132lb-ft/ton
Calculated
Estimated range
537km334mi
Calculated
570km354mi
Calculated
Displacement
2,792cc170cu in
3,195cc195cu in
Length
4,680mm184in
4,660mm183in
Width
1,752mm69in
1,828mm72in
Height
1,471mm58in
1,422mm56in
Wheelbase
2,675mm105in
2,700mm106in
Front track
1,524mm60in
1,578mm62in
Rear track
1,506mm59in
1,555mm61in
Ground clearance
127mm5in
-
Trunk volume
425L
405L
Doors
4
4
Seats
5
5
Fuel tank
58L
69L
CO2 emissions
259g/km
286g/km

Performance charts

Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.

Dyno simulation

Estimated stock-style power and torque curves by engine speed.

Cadillac BLS 2.8 T V6Alfa Romeo 159 3.2 JTS V6PowerTorque
  • Cadillac BLS 2.8 T V6: Power / Torque
  • Alfa Romeo 159 3.2 JTS V6: Power / Torque
Dyno simulation data table
VehiclePeak power RPMPeak torque RPMMax engine speed
CadillacBLS2.8 T V65,500 rpm1,800-4,500 rpm5,750 rpm
Alfa Romeo1593.2 JTS V66,300 rpm4,500 rpm6,550 rpm

Acceleration curve

Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.

Acceleration and drag-race table
MetricCadillacBLS2.8 T V6Alfa Romeo1593.2 JTS V6
Acceleration checkpoints
0-60 mph
0-97 km/h
7.2 s
6.9 s
0-100 km/h
0-62 mph
7.5 s
7.2 s
0-200 km/h
0-124 mph
25.1 s
24.2 s
Top speed
245 km/h
152 mph
244 km/h
152 mph
Drag race simulation
60 ft
18 m
2.8 s
2.7 s
330 ft
101 m
7.0 s
6.9 s
1/8 mile
201 m
10.3 s
10.1 s
1000 ft
305 m
13.0 s
12.8 s
1/4 mile
402 m
15.3 s
15.1 s
Trap speed
1/4 mile
402 m
159 km/h
99 mph
161 km/h
100 mph

Power comparison

Bar comparison chart for Power. Higher is better · hp / kW

Chart data table
VehicleValue
CadillacBLS2.8 T V6
255 hp
190 kW
Alfa Romeo1593.2 JTS V6
260 hp
194 kW

Alfa Romeo 159 3.2 JTS V6 has 5 hp more than Cadillac BLS 2.8 T V6.

The biggest power difference is between Cadillac BLS 2.8 T V6 and Alfa Romeo 159 3.2 JTS V6: 5 hp (4 kW).

Torque comparison

Bar comparison chart for Torque. Higher is better · Nm / lb-ft

Chart data table
VehicleValue
CadillacBLS2.8 T V6
365 Nm
269 lb-ft
Alfa Romeo1593.2 JTS V6
322 Nm
237 lb-ft

Curb weight comparison

Bar comparison chart for Curb weight. Lower is better · kg / lb

Chart data table
VehicleValue
CadillacBLS2.8 T V6
1,585 kg
3,494 lb
Alfa Romeo1593.2 JTS V6
1,630 kg
3,594 lb

Top speed without limiter comparison

Bar comparison chart for Top speed without limiter. Higher is better · km/h / mph

Chart data table
VehicleValue
CadillacBLS2.8 T V6
245 km/h
152 mph
Alfa Romeo1593.2 JTS V6
244 km/h
152 mph

0-100 km/h comparison

Bar comparison chart for 0-100 km/h. Lower is better · seconds

Chart data table
VehicleValue
CadillacBLS2.8 T V67.5 s
Alfa Romeo1593.2 JTS V67.2 s

The biggest 0-100 km/h difference is between Alfa Romeo 159 3.2 JTS V6 and Cadillac BLS 2.8 T V6: 0.3 s.

Fuel consumption comparison

Bar comparison chart for Fuel consumption. Lower is better · L/100 km / mpg US / mpg UK

Chart data table
VehicleValue
CadillacBLS2.8 T V6
10.8 L/100 km
21.8 mpg US
26.2 mpg UK
Alfa Romeo1593.2 JTS V6
12.1 L/100 km
19.4 mpg US
23.3 mpg UK

The biggest fuel consumption difference is between Cadillac BLS 2.8 T V6 and Alfa Romeo 159 3.2 JTS V6: 1.3 L/100 km.

Power-to-weight comparison

Bar comparison chart for Power-to-weight. Higher is better · hp/t / kW/t

Chart data table
VehicleValue
CadillacBLS2.8 T V6
161 hp/t
120 kW/t
6.2 kg/hp
Alfa Romeo1593.2 JTS V6
160 hp/t
119 kW/t
6.3 kg/hp

Estimated range comparison

Bar comparison chart for Estimated range. Higher is better · km / mi

Chart data table
VehicleValue
CadillacBLS2.8 T V6
537 km
334 mi
Alfa Romeo1593.2 JTS V6
570 km
354 mi

Performance spider chart

Radar chart comparing normalized performance and fuel-consumption scores.

Chart data table
VehiclePowerAccelerationTop speed
CadillacBLS2.8 T V6
255 hp
190 kW
7.5 s
245 km/h
152 mph
Alfa Romeo1593.2 JTS V6
260 hp
194 kW
7.2 s
244 km/h
152 mph

Most attractive quadrant

Scatter chart with performance score on the X axis and practicality score on the Y axis.

Chart data table
VehiclePerformance scorePracticality score
CadillacBLS2.8 T V6
Power
255 hp
190 kW
0-100 km/h7.5 s
Top speed
245 km/h
152 mph
Doors/seats
4 doors
5 seats
Trunk
425 L
15.0 cu ft
Length
4,680 mm
184.3 in
Height
1,471 mm
57.9 in
Alfa Romeo1593.2 JTS V6
Power
260 hp
194 kW
0-100 km/h7.2 s
Top speed
244 km/h
152 mph
Doors/seats
4 doors
5 seats
Trunk
405 L
14.3 cu ft
Length
4,660 mm
183.5 in
Height
1,422 mm
56.0 in

Performance vs fuel economy

Cars closer to the top-right corner combine stronger performance with better fuel economy scores.

Performance vs fuel economy data table
VehiclePerformance scoreFuel economy score
CadillacBLS2.8 T V6
Power
255 hp
190 kW
0-100 km/h7.5 s
Top speed
245 km/h
152 mph
10.8 L/100 km
21.8 mpg US
26.2 mpg UK
Alfa Romeo1593.2 JTS V6
Power
260 hp
194 kW
0-100 km/h7.2 s
Top speed
244 km/h
152 mph
12.1 L/100 km
19.4 mpg US
23.3 mpg UK

Cadillac BLS 2.8 T V6 is closest to the top-right balance target for performance and fuel economy.

Acceleration vs fuel consumption

Cars closer to the lower-left corner offer a better mix of quick acceleration and low fuel consumption.

Acceleration vs fuel consumption data table
VehicleFuel consumption, L/100 km0-100 km/h, s
CadillacBLS2.8 T V6
10.8 L/100 km
21.8 mpg US
26.2 mpg UK
7.5 s
Alfa Romeo1593.2 JTS V6
12.1 L/100 km
19.4 mpg US
23.3 mpg UK
7.2 s

Power-to-weight vs fuel consumption

The shaded area favors higher power-to-weight with lower combined fuel consumption.

Power-to-weight vs fuel consumption data table
VehiclePower-to-weight, hp/tFuel consumption, L/100 km
CadillacBLS2.8 T V6
161 hp/t
120 kW/t
6.2 kg/hp
10.8 L/100 km
21.8 mpg US
26.2 mpg UK
Alfa Romeo1593.2 JTS V6
160 hp/t
119 kW/t
6.3 kg/hp
12.1 L/100 km
19.4 mpg US
23.3 mpg UK

Detailed score breakdown

Detailed score breakdown
VehicleCadillacBLS2.8 T V6Alfa Romeo1593.2 JTS V6
Power
255 hp
190 kW
260 hp
194 kW
Torque
365 Nm
269 lb-ft
322 Nm
237 lb-ft
Acceleration
7.5 s
7.2 s
Top speed
245 km/h
152 mph
244 km/h
152 mph
Lightness
1,585 kg
3,494 lb
1,630 kg
3,594 lb
Fuel consumption
10.8 L/100 km
21.8 mpg US
26.2 mpg UK
12.1 L/100 km
19.4 mpg US
23.3 mpg UK
Practicality
Doors/seats
4 doors
5 seats
Trunk
425 L
15.0 cu ft
Length
4,680 mm
184.3 in
Height
1,471 mm
57.9 in
Doors/seats
4 doors
5 seats
Trunk
405 L
14.3 cu ft
Length
4,660 mm
183.5 in
Height
1,422 mm
56.0 in
Range score
537 km
334 mi
570 km
354 mi
CO2 score
259 g/km
286 g/km
Trunk score
425 L
15.0 cu ft
405 L
14.3 cu ft
Power-to-weight score
161 hp/t
120 kW/t
6.2 kg/hp
160 hp/t
119 kW/t
6.3 kg/hp
Overall
Fixed score
Fixed score

Fuel cost and annual usage

Estimate running costs from combined consumption, your annual distance, and the fuel price in your local currency.

Enter the fuel price in your local currency, for example €/L, $/gal, £/L or any other local currency.

LC = Local Currency

Fuel cost and annual usage
VehicleCadillac BLS 2.8 T V6Alfa Romeo 159 3.2 JTS V6
Consumption10.8 L/100 km21.8 mpg US26.2 mpg UK12.1 L/100 km19.4 mpg US23.3 mpg UK
Cost / 100 km18.90 LC100 km21.18 LC100 km
Cost / 100 mi30.42 LC100 mi34.08 LC100 mi
Annual fuel used1,620 L428 US gal356 UK gal1,815 L479 US gal399 UK gal
Annual fuel cost2,835 LC/year3,176 LC/year

Head-to-head comparisons

Cadillac BLS 2.8 T V6

  • Has 43 Nm more
  • Is 45 kg lighter
  • Has 1 km/h (1 mph) higher top speed
  • Uses 1.3 L/100 km less fuel
  • Has 1 hp/t better power-to-weight
  • Has 20 L more trunk volume
  • Emits 27 g/km less CO2

Pros

  • Highest top speed
  • Highest torque
  • Lightest
  • Lowest combined fuel consumption
  • Best power-to-weight ratio
  • Largest trunk

Cons

  • Slowest 0-100 km/h
  • Lowest power

Alfa Romeo 159 3.2 JTS V6

  • Has 5 hp more
  • Is 0.3 s quicker from 0-100 km/h
  • Has 33 km (21 mi) more estimated range

Pros

  • Quickest 0-100 km/h in this comparison
  • Most powerful
  • Best estimated range

Cons

  • Highest combined fuel consumption
  • Heaviest
  • Lowest top speed
  • Smallest trunk
  • Highest CO2 emissions

Choose cars to compare

Brand
Model
Generation
Engine or modification
Cadillac BLS 2.8 T V6
Alfa Romeo 159 3.2 JTS V6
Compare selected cars
2 vehicles selected

Popular comparisons

2.8 T V6
2.8 T V6
VS
CadillacBLS2.8 T V6vsCadillacBLS Wagon2.8 T V6
3.2 JTS V6
3.2 JTS V6
VS
Alfa Romeo1593.2 JTS V6vsAlfa Romeo159 Sportwagon3.2 JTS V6
2.8 T V6
3.6 i V6
VS
CadillacBLS2.8 T V6vsCadillacSTS3.6 i V6
3.2 JTS V6
2.8 T V6
VS
Alfa Romeo1593.2 JTS V6vsCadillacBLS2.8 T V6
2.8 T V6
3.2 V6 FSI
VS
CadillacBLS2.8 T V6vsVolkswagenPassat (B6)3.2 V6 FSI
2.8 T V6
3.2 JTS V6
VS
CadillacBLS2.8 T V6vsAlfa Romeo1593.2 JTS V6
3.2 JTS V6
3.3 V6
VS
Alfa Romeo1593.2 JTS V6vsHyundaiSonata V (NF)Facelift 20083.3 V6
3.2 JTS V6
2.4i T5 20V
VS
Alfa Romeo1593.2 JTS V6vsVolvoS602.4i T5 20V
2.8 T V6
3.2 FSI V6
VS
CadillacBLS2.8 T V6vsAUDIA6 (4F/C6)3.2 FSI V6
3.2 JTS V6
350
VS
Alfa Romeo1593.2 JTS V6vsLexusES V (XV40)350
2.8 T V6
28T
VS
CadillacBLS2.8 T V6vsCadillacXTS28T
2.8 T V6
2.0
VS
CadillacBLS2.8 T V6vsCadillacCTS III2.0
Cadillac BLS 2.8 T V6 vs Alfa Romeo 159 3.2 JTS V6 - car comparison - FastVsFaster