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
- Lightest1,630 kg3,594 lb
- Best power-to-weight156 hp/t117 kW/t6.4 kg/hp
- Lowest combined fuel consumption11.5 L/100 km20.5 mpg US24.6 mpg UK
- Lowest city consumption18.0 L/100 km13.1 mpg US15.7 mpg UK
- Lowest highway consumption7.7 L/100 km30.5 mpg US36.7 mpg UK
- Best overall score63/100
- Best economy score76/100
- Best practicality score81/100
Alfa Romeo 159 Sportwagon 3.2 JTS V6
- Quickest 0-100 km/h7.3 s
- Most powerful260 hp194 kW
- Best estimated range566 km351 mi
- Largest trunk445 L
- Best performance score55/100
Specification comparison
| Model | CadillacBLS Wagon2.8 T V6 | Alfa Romeo159 Sportwagon3.2 JTS V6 |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 255hp190kW | 260hp194kW |
| Torque | 350Nm258lb-ft | 322Nm237lb-ft |
| Curb weight | 1,630kg3,594lb | 1,680kg3,704lb |
| Gross weight | 2,170kg4,784lb | 2,230kg4,916lb |
| Top speed | Unrestricted 250 km/h155 mph Restricted 240 km/h149 mph Calculated | 242 km/h 150 mph |
| To 99% top speed | 85.2s99% target: 248 km/h / 154 mph Calculated | 72.7s99% target: 240 km/h / 149 mph Calculated |
| 0-100 km/h | 8.0s | 7.3s |
| 0-200 km/h | 27.5s Calculated | 25.9s Calculated |
| 0-60 mph | 7.6s Calculated | 7.0s Calculated |
| Fuel consumption | 11.5L/100 km20.5mpg US24.6mpg UK | 12.2L/100 km19.3mpg US23.2mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption city | 18L/100 km13.1mpg US15.7mpg UK | 18.3L/100 km12.9mpg US15.4mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption highway | 7.7L/100 km30.5mpg US36.7mpg UK | 8.6L/100 km27.4mpg US32.8mpg UK |
| Quarter mile | 15.7s Calculated | 15.2s Calculated |
| Power-to-weight | 156hp/t117kW/t71hp/1000 lb Calculated | 155hp/t115kW/t70hp/1000 lb Calculated |
| Torque-to-weight | 215Nm/t144lb-ft/ton Calculated | 192Nm/t128lb-ft/ton Calculated |
| Estimated range | 504km313mi Calculated | 566km351mi 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 | - | 288g/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 | 7.6 s | 7.0 s |
0-100 km/h 0-62 mph | 8.0 s | 7.3 s |
0-200 km/h 0-124 mph | 27.5 s | 25.9 s |
| Top speed | Unrestricted 250 km/h155 mph Restricted 240 km/h149 mph Likely limited | 242 km/h 150 mph |
| Drag race simulation | ||
60 ft 18 m | 2.8 s | 2.7 s |
330 ft 101 m | 7.1 s | 6.8 s |
1/8 mile 201 m | 10.5 s | 10.1 s |
1000 ft 305 m | 13.4 s | 12.9 s |
1/4 mile 402 m | 15.7 s | 15.2 s |
Trap speed 1/4 mile 402 m | 154 km/h 96 mph | 158 km/h 98 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 | 1,630 kg 3,594 lb |
| Alfa Romeo159 Sportwagon3.2 JTS V6 | 1,680 kg 3,704 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 | 242 km/h 150 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 | 8.0 s |
| Alfa Romeo159 Sportwagon3.2 JTS V6 | 7.3 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: 0.7 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 | 11.5 L/100 km 20.5 mpg US 24.6 mpg UK |
| Alfa Romeo159 Sportwagon3.2 JTS V6 | 12.2 L/100 km 19.3 mpg US 23.2 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 | 156 hp/t 117 kW/t 6.4 kg/hp |
| Alfa Romeo159 Sportwagon3.2 JTS V6 | 155 hp/t 115 kW/t 6.5 kg/hp |
Estimated range comparison
Bar comparison chart for Estimated range. Higher is better · km / mi
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| CadillacBLS Wagon2.8 T V6 | 504 km 313 mi |
| Alfa Romeo159 Sportwagon3.2 JTS V6 | 566 km 351 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 | 8.0 s | Unrestricted 250 km/h155 mph Restricted 240 km/h149 mph |
| Alfa Romeo159 Sportwagon3.2 JTS V6 | 260 hp 194 kW | 7.3 s | 242 km/h 150 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 |
| 11.5 L/100 km 20.5 mpg US 24.6 mpg UK | ||||||
| Alfa Romeo159 Sportwagon3.2 JTS V6 |
| 12.2 L/100 km 19.3 mpg US 23.2 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 | 11.5 L/100 km 20.5 mpg US 24.6 mpg UK | 8.0 s |
| Alfa Romeo159 Sportwagon3.2 JTS V6 | 12.2 L/100 km 19.3 mpg US 23.2 mpg UK | 7.3 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 | 156 hp/t 117 kW/t 6.4 kg/hp | 11.5 L/100 km 20.5 mpg US 24.6 mpg UK |
| Alfa Romeo159 Sportwagon3.2 JTS V6 | 155 hp/t 115 kW/t 6.5 kg/hp | 12.2 L/100 km 19.3 mpg US 23.2 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 | 8.0 s | 7.3 s | ||||||||||||||||
| Top speed | Unrestricted 250 km/h155 mph Restricted 240 km/h149 mph | 242 km/h 150 mph | ||||||||||||||||
| Lightness | 1,630 kg 3,594 lb | 1,680 kg 3,704 lb | ||||||||||||||||
| Fuel consumption | 11.5 L/100 km 20.5 mpg US 24.6 mpg UK | 12.2 L/100 km 19.3 mpg US 23.2 mpg UK | ||||||||||||||||
| Practicality |
|
| ||||||||||||||||
| Range score | 504 km 313 mi | 566 km 351 mi | ||||||||||||||||
| CO2 score | - | 288 g/km | ||||||||||||||||
| Trunk score | 419 L 14.8 cu ft | 445 L 15.7 cu ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Power-to-weight score | 156 hp/t 117 kW/t 6.4 kg/hp | 155 hp/t 115 kW/t 6.5 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 | 11.5 L/100 km20.5 mpg US24.6 mpg UK | 12.2 L/100 km19.3 mpg US23.2 mpg UK |
| Cost / 100 km | 20.13 LC100 km | 21.35 LC100 km |
| Cost / 100 mi | 32.39 LC100 mi | 34.36 LC100 mi |
| Annual fuel used | 1,725 L456 US gal379 UK gal | 1,830 L483 US gal403 UK gal |
| Annual fuel cost | 3,019 LC/year | 3,203 LC/year |
Head-to-head comparisons
Cadillac BLS Wagon 2.8 T V6
- Has 28 Nm more
- Is 50 kg lighter
- Has 8 km/h (5 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 0.7 s quicker from 0-100 km/h
- Has 61 km (38 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























