Cadillac BLS Wagon
Car comparison
Cadillac BLS Wagon 2.8 T V6vsAlfa Romeo 159 Sportwagon 3.2 JTS V6
Compare specs, acceleration, fuel consumption, dimensions, practicality, and estimated running costs side by side.
New comparisonAlfa Romeo 159 Sportwagon
3.2 JTS V6
Comparison overview
Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.
Best choices
Cadillac BLS Wagon 2.8 T V6
- Fastest top speed250 km/h155 mph Unrestricted240 km/h149 mph Restricted
- Highest torque350 Nm258 lb-ft
- Lightest1,605 kg3,538 lb
- Best power-to-weight159 hp/t118 kW/t6.3 kg/hp
- Lowest combined fuel consumption10.7 L/100 km22.0 mpg US26.4 mpg UK
- Lowest city consumption16.2 L/100 km14.5 mpg US17.4 mpg UK
- Lowest highway consumption7.5 L/100 km31.4 mpg US37.7 mpg UK
- Best overall score64/100
- Best performance score56/100
- Best economy score78/100
- Best practicality score81/100
Alfa Romeo 159 Sportwagon 3.2 JTS V6
- Quickest 0-100 km/h7.0 s
- Most powerful260 hp194 kW
- Best estimated range605 km376 mi
- Largest trunk445 L
Specification comparison
| Model | CadillacBLS Wagon2.8 T V6 | Alfa Romeo159 Sportwagon3.2 JTS V6 |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 255hp190kW | 260hp194kW |
| Torque | 350Nm258lb-ft | 322Nm237lb-ft |
| Curb weight | 1,605kg3,538lb | 1,660kg3,660lb |
| Gross weight | 2,150kg4,740lb | 2,210kg4,872lb |
| Top speed | Unrestricted 250 km/h155 mph Restricted 240 km/h149 mph Calculated | 244 km/h 152 mph |
| To 99% top speed | 78.3s99% target: 248 km/h / 154 mph Calculated | 70.3s99% target: 242 km/h / 150 mph Calculated |
| 0-100 km/h | 7.4s | 7.0s |
| 0-200 km/h | 25.4s Calculated | 24.5s Calculated |
| 0-60 mph | 7.1s Calculated | 6.7s Calculated |
| Fuel consumption | 10.7L/100 km22mpg US26.4mpg UK | 11.4L/100 km20.6mpg US24.8mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption city | 16.2L/100 km14.5mpg US17.4mpg UK | 16.7L/100 km14.1mpg US16.9mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption highway | 7.5L/100 km31.4mpg US37.7mpg UK | 8.3L/100 km28.3mpg US34.0mpg UK |
| Quarter mile | 15.2s Calculated | 14.9s Calculated |
| Power-to-weight | 159hp/t118kW/t72hp/1000 lb Calculated | 157hp/t117kW/t71hp/1000 lb Calculated |
| Torque-to-weight | 218Nm/t146lb-ft/ton Calculated | 194Nm/t130lb-ft/ton Calculated |
| Estimated range | 542km337mi Calculated | 605km376mi Calculated |
| Displacement | 2,792cc170cu in | 3,195cc195cu in |
| Length | 4,716mm186in | 4,660mm183in |
| Width | 1,802mm71in | 1,828mm72in |
| Height | 1,543mm61in | 1,422mm56in |
| Wheelbase | 2,675mm105in | 2,700mm106in |
| Front track | 1,524mm60in | 1,578mm62in |
| Rear track | 1,506mm59in | 1,555mm61in |
| Ground clearance | 127mm5in | - |
| Trunk volume | 419L | 445L |
| Max trunk volume | 1,273L | 1,235L |
| Doors | 5 | 5 |
| Seats | 5 | 5 |
| Fuel tank | 58L | 69L |
| CO2 emissions | - | 270g/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 Wagon 2.8 T V6: Power / Torque
- Alfa Romeo 159 Sportwagon 3.2 JTS V6: Power / Torque
| Vehicle | Peak power RPM | Peak torque RPM | Max engine speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| CadillacBLS Wagon2.8 T V6 | 5,500 rpm | 1,800-4,500 rpm | 5,750 rpm |
| Alfa Romeo159 Sportwagon3.2 JTS V6 | 6,300 rpm | 4,500 rpm | 6,550 rpm |
Acceleration curve
Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.
| Metric | CadillacBLS Wagon2.8 T V6 | Alfa Romeo159 Sportwagon3.2 JTS V6 |
|---|---|---|
| Acceleration checkpoints | ||
0-60 mph 0-97 km/h | 7.1 s | 6.7 s |
0-100 km/h 0-62 mph | 7.4 s | 7.0 s |
0-200 km/h 0-124 mph | 25.4 s | 24.5 s |
| Top speed | Unrestricted 250 km/h155 mph Restricted 240 km/h149 mph Likely limited | 244 km/h 152 mph |
| Drag race simulation | ||
60 ft 18 m | 2.7 s | 2.6 s |
330 ft 101 m | 6.9 s | 6.7 s |
1/8 mile 201 m | 10.1 s | 9.9 s |
1000 ft 305 m | 12.9 s | 12.6 s |
1/4 mile 402 m | 15.2 s | 14.9 s |
Trap speed 1/4 mile 402 m | 158 km/h 98 mph | 161 km/h 100 mph |
Power comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power. Higher is better · hp / kW
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| CadillacBLS Wagon2.8 T V6 | 255 hp 190 kW |
| Alfa Romeo159 Sportwagon3.2 JTS V6 | 260 hp 194 kW |
Alfa Romeo 159 Sportwagon 3.2 JTS V6 has 5 hp more than Cadillac BLS Wagon 2.8 T V6.
The biggest power difference is between Cadillac BLS Wagon 2.8 T V6 and Alfa Romeo 159 Sportwagon 3.2 JTS V6: 5 hp (4 kW).
Torque comparison
Bar comparison chart for Torque. Higher is better · Nm / lb-ft
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| CadillacBLS Wagon2.8 T V6 | 350 Nm 258 lb-ft |
| Alfa Romeo159 Sportwagon3.2 JTS V6 | 322 Nm 237 lb-ft |
Curb weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Curb weight. Lower is better · kg / lb
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| CadillacBLS Wagon2.8 T V6 | 1,605 kg 3,538 lb |
| Alfa Romeo159 Sportwagon3.2 JTS V6 | 1,660 kg 3,660 lb |
Top speed without limiter comparison
Bar comparison chart for Top speed without limiter. Higher is better · km/h / mph
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| CadillacBLS Wagon2.8 T V6 | Unrestricted 250 km/h155 mph Restricted 240 km/h149 mph |
| Alfa Romeo159 Sportwagon3.2 JTS V6 | 244 km/h 152 mph |
0-100 km/h comparison
Bar comparison chart for 0-100 km/h. Lower is better · seconds
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| CadillacBLS Wagon2.8 T V6 | 7.4 s |
| Alfa Romeo159 Sportwagon3.2 JTS V6 | 7.0 s |
The biggest 0-100 km/h difference is between Alfa Romeo 159 Sportwagon 3.2 JTS V6 and Cadillac BLS Wagon 2.8 T V6: 0.4 s.
Fuel consumption comparison
Bar comparison chart for Fuel consumption. Lower is better · L/100 km / mpg US / mpg UK
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| CadillacBLS Wagon2.8 T V6 | 10.7 L/100 km 22.0 mpg US 26.4 mpg UK |
| Alfa Romeo159 Sportwagon3.2 JTS V6 | 11.4 L/100 km 20.6 mpg US 24.8 mpg UK |
The biggest fuel consumption difference is between Cadillac BLS Wagon 2.8 T V6 and Alfa Romeo 159 Sportwagon 3.2 JTS V6: 0.7 L/100 km.
Power-to-weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power-to-weight. Higher is better · hp/t / kW/t
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| CadillacBLS Wagon2.8 T V6 | 159 hp/t 118 kW/t 6.3 kg/hp |
| Alfa Romeo159 Sportwagon3.2 JTS V6 | 157 hp/t 117 kW/t 6.4 kg/hp |
Estimated range comparison
Bar comparison chart for Estimated range. Higher is better · km / mi
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| CadillacBLS Wagon2.8 T V6 | 542 km 337 mi |
| Alfa Romeo159 Sportwagon3.2 JTS V6 | 605 km 376 mi |
Performance spider chart
Radar chart comparing normalized performance and fuel-consumption scores.
| Vehicle | Power | Acceleration | Top speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| CadillacBLS Wagon2.8 T V6 | 255 hp 190 kW | 7.4 s | Unrestricted 250 km/h155 mph Restricted 240 km/h149 mph |
| Alfa Romeo159 Sportwagon3.2 JTS V6 | 260 hp 194 kW | 7.0 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.
| Vehicle | Performance score | Practicality score | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CadillacBLS Wagon2.8 T V6 |
|
| ||||||||||||||
| Alfa Romeo159 Sportwagon3.2 JTS V6 |
|
| ||||||||||||||
Performance vs fuel economy
Cars closer to the top-right corner combine stronger performance with better fuel economy scores.
| Vehicle | Performance score | Fuel economy score | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CadillacBLS Wagon2.8 T V6 |
| 10.7 L/100 km 22.0 mpg US 26.4 mpg UK | ||||||
| Alfa Romeo159 Sportwagon3.2 JTS V6 |
| 11.4 L/100 km 20.6 mpg US 24.8 mpg UK | ||||||
Cadillac BLS Wagon 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.
| Vehicle | Fuel consumption, L/100 km | 0-100 km/h, s |
|---|---|---|
| CadillacBLS Wagon2.8 T V6 | 10.7 L/100 km 22.0 mpg US 26.4 mpg UK | 7.4 s |
| Alfa Romeo159 Sportwagon3.2 JTS V6 | 11.4 L/100 km 20.6 mpg US 24.8 mpg UK | 7.0 s |
Power-to-weight vs fuel consumption
The shaded area favors higher power-to-weight with lower combined fuel consumption.
| Vehicle | Power-to-weight, hp/t | Fuel consumption, L/100 km |
|---|---|---|
| CadillacBLS Wagon2.8 T V6 | 159 hp/t 118 kW/t 6.3 kg/hp | 10.7 L/100 km 22.0 mpg US 26.4 mpg UK |
| Alfa Romeo159 Sportwagon3.2 JTS V6 | 157 hp/t 117 kW/t 6.4 kg/hp | 11.4 L/100 km 20.6 mpg US 24.8 mpg UK |
Detailed score breakdown
| Vehicle | CadillacBLS Wagon2.8 T V6 | Alfa Romeo159 Sportwagon3.2 JTS V6 | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power | 255 hp 190 kW | 260 hp 194 kW | ||||||||||||||||
| Torque | 350 Nm 258 lb-ft | 322 Nm 237 lb-ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Acceleration | 7.4 s | 7.0 s | ||||||||||||||||
| Top speed | Unrestricted 250 km/h155 mph Restricted 240 km/h149 mph | 244 km/h 152 mph | ||||||||||||||||
| Lightness | 1,605 kg 3,538 lb | 1,660 kg 3,660 lb | ||||||||||||||||
| Fuel consumption | 10.7 L/100 km 22.0 mpg US 26.4 mpg UK | 11.4 L/100 km 20.6 mpg US 24.8 mpg UK | ||||||||||||||||
| Practicality |
|
| ||||||||||||||||
| Range score | 542 km 337 mi | 605 km 376 mi | ||||||||||||||||
| CO2 score | - | 270 g/km | ||||||||||||||||
| Trunk score | 419 L 14.8 cu ft | 445 L 15.7 cu ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Power-to-weight score | 159 hp/t 118 kW/t 6.3 kg/hp | 157 hp/t 117 kW/t 6.4 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
| Vehicle | Cadillac BLS Wagon 2.8 T V6 | Alfa Romeo 159 Sportwagon 3.2 JTS V6 |
|---|---|---|
| Consumption | 10.7 L/100 km22 mpg US26.4 mpg UK | 11.4 L/100 km20.6 mpg US24.8 mpg UK |
| Cost / 100 km | 18.72 LC100 km | 19.95 LC100 km |
| Cost / 100 mi | 30.13 LC100 mi | 32.11 LC100 mi |
| Annual fuel used | 1,605 L424 US gal353 UK gal | 1,710 L452 US gal376 UK gal |
| Annual fuel cost | 2,809 LC/year | 2,993 LC/year |
Head-to-head comparisons
Cadillac BLS Wagon 2.8 T V6
- Has 28 Nm more
- Is 55 kg lighter
- Has 6 km/h (4 mph) higher top speed
- Uses 0.7 L/100 km less fuel
- Has 2 hp/t better power-to-weight
Pros
- Highest top speed
- Highest torque
- Lightest
- Lowest combined fuel consumption
- Best power-to-weight ratio
Cons
- Slowest 0-100 km/h
- Lowest power
- Smallest trunk
Alfa Romeo 159 Sportwagon 3.2 JTS V6
- Has 5 hp more
- Is 0.4 s quicker from 0-100 km/h
- Has 63 km (39 mi) more estimated range
- Has 26 L more trunk volume
Pros
- Quickest 0-100 km/h in this comparison
- Most powerful
- Best estimated range
- Largest trunk
Cons
- Highest combined fuel consumption
- Heaviest
- Lowest top speed
Choose cars to compare
Popular comparisons























