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 comparison

Cadillac BLS Wagon

2.8 T V6

255 hp2792 ccGasolineFWDManualTurbochargedWagon / estate2007-2009
VS

Alfa Romeo 159 Sportwagon

3.2 JTS V6

260 hp3195 ccGasolineAWDAutomaticNaturally aspiratedWagon / estate2007-2010

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 speed
    250 km/h
    155 mph Unrestricted
    240 km/h
    149 mph Restricted
  • Highest torque
    350 Nm
    258 lb-ft
  • Lightest
    1,605 kg
    3,538 lb
  • Best power-to-weight
    159 hp/t
    118 kW/t
    6.3 kg/hp
  • Lowest combined fuel consumption
    10.7 L/100 km
    22.0 mpg US
    26.4 mpg UK
  • Lowest city consumption
    16.2 L/100 km
    14.5 mpg US
    17.4 mpg UK
  • Lowest highway consumption
    7.5 L/100 km
    31.4 mpg US
    37.7 mpg UK
  • Best overall score
    64/100
  • Best performance score
    56/100
  • Best economy score
    78/100
  • Best practicality score
    81/100

Specification comparison

Specification comparison
ModelCadillacBLS Wagon2.8 T V6Alfa Romeo159 Sportwagon3.2 JTS V6
Power
255hp190kW
260hp194kW
Torque
350Nm258lb-ft
322Nm237lb-ft
Curb weight
1,605kg3,538lb
1,680kg3,704lb
Gross weight
2,150kg4,740lb
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
78.3s99% target: 248 km/h / 154 mph
Calculated
72.7s99% target: 240 km/h / 149 mph
Calculated
0-100 km/h
7.4s
7.3s
0-200 km/h
25.4s
Calculated
25.9s
Calculated
0-60 mph
7.1s
Calculated
7.0s
Calculated
Fuel consumption
10.7L/100 km22mpg US26.4mpg UK
12.2L/100 km19.3mpg US23.2mpg UK
Fuel consumption city
16.2L/100 km14.5mpg US17.4mpg UK
18.3L/100 km12.9mpg US15.4mpg UK
Fuel consumption highway
7.5L/100 km31.4mpg US37.7mpg UK
8.6L/100 km27.4mpg US32.8mpg UK
Quarter mile
15.2s
Calculated
15.2s
Calculated
Power-to-weight
159hp/t118kW/t72hp/1000 lb
Calculated
155hp/t115kW/t70hp/1000 lb
Calculated
Torque-to-weight
218Nm/t146lb-ft/ton
Calculated
192Nm/t128lb-ft/ton
Calculated
Estimated range
542km337mi
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 V6Alfa Romeo 159 Sportwagon 3.2 JTS V6PowerTorque
  • Cadillac BLS Wagon 2.8 T V6: Power / Torque
  • Alfa Romeo 159 Sportwagon 3.2 JTS V6: Power / Torque
Dyno simulation data table
VehiclePeak power RPMPeak torque RPMMax engine speed
CadillacBLS Wagon2.8 T V65,500 rpm1,800-4,500 rpm5,750 rpm
Alfa Romeo159 Sportwagon3.2 JTS V66,300 rpm4,500 rpm6,550 rpm

Acceleration curve

Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.

Acceleration and drag-race table
MetricCadillacBLS Wagon2.8 T V6Alfa Romeo159 Sportwagon3.2 JTS V6
Acceleration checkpoints
0-60 mph
0-97 km/h
7.1 s
7.0 s
0-100 km/h
0-62 mph
7.4 s
7.3 s
0-200 km/h
0-124 mph
25.4 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
2.7 s
2.7 s
330 ft
101 m
6.9 s
6.8 s
1/8 mile
201 m
10.1 s
10.1 s
1000 ft
305 m
12.9 s
12.9 s
1/4 mile
402 m
15.2 s
15.2 s
Trap speed
1/4 mile
402 m
158 km/h
98 mph
158 km/h
98 mph

Power comparison

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

Chart data table
VehicleValue
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

Chart data table
VehicleValue
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

Chart data table
VehicleValue
CadillacBLS Wagon2.8 T V6
1,605 kg
3,538 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

Chart data table
VehicleValue
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

Chart data table
VehicleValue
CadillacBLS Wagon2.8 T V67.4 s
Alfa Romeo159 Sportwagon3.2 JTS V67.3 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: 0.1 s.

Fuel consumption comparison

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

Chart data table
VehicleValue
CadillacBLS Wagon2.8 T V6
10.7 L/100 km
22.0 mpg US
26.4 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: 1.5 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
CadillacBLS Wagon2.8 T V6
159 hp/t
118 kW/t
6.3 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

Chart data table
VehicleValue
CadillacBLS Wagon2.8 T V6
542 km
337 mi
Alfa Romeo159 Sportwagon3.2 JTS V6
566 km
351 mi

Performance spider chart

Radar chart comparing normalized performance and fuel-consumption scores.

Chart data table
VehiclePowerAccelerationTop 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
7.3 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.

Chart data table
VehiclePerformance scorePracticality score
CadillacBLS Wagon2.8 T V6
Power
255 hp
190 kW
0-100 km/h7.4 s
Top speed
Unrestricted
250 km/h155 mph
Restricted
240 km/h149 mph
Doors/seats
5 doors
5 seats
Trunk
419 L
14.8 cu ft
Length
4,716 mm
185.7 in
Height
1,543 mm
60.7 in
Alfa Romeo159 Sportwagon3.2 JTS V6
Power
260 hp
194 kW
0-100 km/h7.3 s
Top speed
242 km/h
150 mph
Doors/seats
5 doors
5 seats
Trunk
445 L
15.7 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
CadillacBLS Wagon2.8 T V6
Power
255 hp
190 kW
0-100 km/h7.4 s
Top speed
Unrestricted
250 km/h155 mph
Restricted
240 km/h149 mph
10.7 L/100 km
22.0 mpg US
26.4 mpg UK
Alfa Romeo159 Sportwagon3.2 JTS V6
Power
260 hp
194 kW
0-100 km/h7.3 s
Top speed
242 km/h
150 mph
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.

Acceleration vs fuel consumption data table
VehicleFuel consumption, L/100 km0-100 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
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.

Power-to-weight vs fuel consumption data table
VehiclePower-to-weight, hp/tFuel 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
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

Detailed score breakdown
VehicleCadillacBLS Wagon2.8 T V6Alfa 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
7.3 s
Top speed
Unrestricted
250 km/h155 mph
Restricted
240 km/h149 mph
242 km/h
150 mph
Lightness
1,605 kg
3,538 lb
1,680 kg
3,704 lb
Fuel consumption
10.7 L/100 km
22.0 mpg US
26.4 mpg UK
12.2 L/100 km
19.3 mpg US
23.2 mpg UK
Practicality
Doors/seats
5 doors
5 seats
Trunk
419 L
14.8 cu ft
Length
4,716 mm
185.7 in
Height
1,543 mm
60.7 in
Doors/seats
5 doors
5 seats
Trunk
445 L
15.7 cu ft
Length
4,660 mm
183.5 in
Height
1,422 mm
56.0 in
Range score
542 km
337 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
159 hp/t
118 kW/t
6.3 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

Fuel cost and annual usage
VehicleCadillac BLS Wagon 2.8 T V6Alfa Romeo 159 Sportwagon 3.2 JTS V6
Consumption10.7 L/100 km22 mpg US26.4 mpg UK12.2 L/100 km19.3 mpg US23.2 mpg UK
Cost / 100 km18.72 LC100 km21.35 LC100 km
Cost / 100 mi30.13 LC100 mi34.36 LC100 mi
Annual fuel used1,605 L424 US gal353 UK gal1,830 L483 US gal403 UK gal
Annual fuel cost2,809 LC/year3,203 LC/year

Head-to-head comparisons

Cadillac BLS Wagon 2.8 T V6

  • Has 28 Nm more
  • Is 75 kg lighter
  • Has 8 km/h (5 mph) higher top speed
  • Uses 1.5 L/100 km less fuel
  • Has 4 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 0.1 s quicker from 0-100 km/h
  • Has 24 km (15 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

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

Popular comparisons

2.8 T V6
2.8 T V6
VS
CadillacBLS Wagon2.8 T V6vsCadillacBLS2.8 T V6
3.2 JTS V6
3.2 JTS V6
VS
Alfa Romeo159 Sportwagon3.2 JTS V6vsAlfa Romeo1593.2 JTS V6
2.8 T V6
3.2 i V6 24V FSI 4WD
VS
CadillacBLS Wagon2.8 T V6vsVolkswagenPassat Variant (B6)3.2 i V6 24V FSI 4WD
3.2 JTS V6
2.8 T V6
VS
Alfa Romeo159 Sportwagon3.2 JTS V6vsCadillacBLS Wagon2.8 T V6
2.8 T V6
3.2 JTS V6
VS
CadillacBLS Wagon2.8 T V6vsAlfa Romeo159 Sportwagon3.2 JTS V6
2.8 T V6
3.2 FSI V6
VS
CadillacBLS Wagon2.8 T V6vsAUDIA6 allroad (4F/C6)3.2 FSI V6
2.8 T V6
3.2 FSI V6
VS
CadillacBLS Wagon2.8 T V6vsAUDIA6 Avant (4F/C6)3.2 FSI V6
3.2 JTS V6
2.4i 20V T5
VS
Alfa Romeo159 Sportwagon3.2 JTS V6vsVolvoV70 IIFacelift 20042.4i 20V T5
2.8 T V6
330xi
VS
CadillacBLS Wagon2.8 T V6vsBMW3 Series Touring (E91)330xi
2.8 T V6
2.5 T5
VS
CadillacBLS Wagon2.8 T V6vsVolvoV50Facelift 20072.5 T5
2.8 T V6
535d
VS
CadillacBLS Wagon2.8 T V6vsBMW5 Series Touring (E61)535d
3.2 JTS V6
3.0 T6
VS
Alfa Romeo159 Sportwagon3.2 JTS V6vsVolvoXC70 II3.0 T6
Cadillac BLS Wagon 2.8 T V6 vs Alfa Romeo 159 Sportwagon 3.2 JTS V6 - car comparison - FastVsFaster