Alfa Romeo 159 Sportwagon
Car comparison
Alfa Romeo 159 Sportwagon 3.2 JTS V6vsSkoda Superb II Combi 3.6 FSI V6
Compare specs, acceleration, fuel consumption, dimensions, practicality, and estimated running costs side by side.
New comparisonSkoda Superb II Combi
3.6 FSI V6
Comparison overview
Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.
Best choices
Skoda Superb II Combi 3.6 FSI V6
- Quickest 0-100 km/h6.6 s
- Highest torque350 Nm258 lb-ft
- Lowest combined fuel consumption10.2 L/100 km23.1 mpg US27.7 mpg UK
- Lowest city consumption14.4 L/100 km16.3 mpg US19.6 mpg UK
- Lowest highway consumption7.8 L/100 km30.2 mpg US36.2 mpg UK
- Largest trunk633 L
- Best overall score68/100
- Best performance score58/100
- Best economy score79/100
- Best practicality score89/100
Alfa Romeo 159 Sportwagon 3.2 JTS V6
- Fastest top speed248 km/h154 mph
- Most powerful260 hp194 kW
- Lightest1,590 kg3,505 lb
- Best power-to-weight164 hp/t122 kW/t6.1 kg/hp
- Best estimated range622 km386 mi
Specification comparison
| Model | Alfa Romeo159 Sportwagon3.2 JTS V6 | SkodaSuperb II Combi3.6 FSI V6 |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 260hp194kW | 260hp194kW |
| Torque | 322Nm237lb-ft | 350Nm258lb-ft |
| Curb weight | 1,590kg3,505lb | 1,671kg3,684lb |
| Gross weight | 2,140kg4,718lb | 2,307kg5,086lb |
| Top speed | 248 km/h 154 mph | 247 km/h 153 mph |
| To 99% top speed | 72.6s99% target: 246 km/h / 153 mph Calculated | 68.7s99% target: 245 km/h / 152 mph Calculated |
| 0-100 km/h | 7.2s | 6.6s |
| 0-200 km/h | 24.4s Calculated | 23.0s Calculated |
| 0-60 mph | 6.9s Calculated | 6.3s Calculated |
| Fuel consumption | 11.1L/100 km21.2mpg US25.4mpg UK | 10.2L/100 km23.1mpg US27.7mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption city | 16.5L/100 km14.3mpg US17.1mpg UK | 14.4L/100 km16.3mpg US19.6mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption highway | 7.9L/100 km29.8mpg US35.8mpg UK | 7.8L/100 km30.2mpg US36.2mpg UK |
| Quarter mile | 15.1s Calculated | 14.6s Calculated |
| Power-to-weight | 164hp/t122kW/t74hp/1000 lb Calculated | 156hp/t116kW/t71hp/1000 lb Calculated |
| Torque-to-weight | 203Nm/t136lb-ft/ton Calculated | 209Nm/t140lb-ft/ton Calculated |
| Estimated range | 622km386mi Calculated | 588km366mi Calculated |
| Displacement | 3,195cc195cu in | 3,597cc220cu in |
| Length | 4,660mm183in | 4,838mm190in |
| Width | 1,828mm72in | 1,817mm72in |
| Height | 1,422mm56in | 1,510mm59in |
| Wheelbase | 2,700mm106in | 2,761mm109in |
| Front track | 1,578mm62in | 1,545mm61in |
| Rear track | 1,555mm61in | 1,517mm60in |
| Ground clearance | - | 141mm6in |
| Trunk volume | 445L | 633L |
| Max trunk volume | 1,235L | 1,865L |
| Doors | 5 | 5 |
| Seats | 5 | 5 |
| Fuel tank | 69L | 60L |
| CO2 emissions | 262g/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.
- Alfa Romeo 159 Sportwagon 3.2 JTS V6: Power / Torque
- Skoda Superb II Combi 3.6 FSI V6: Power / Torque
| Vehicle | Peak power RPM | Peak torque RPM | Max engine speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Alfa Romeo159 Sportwagon3.2 JTS V6 | 6,300 rpm | 4,500 rpm | 6,550 rpm |
| SkodaSuperb II Combi3.6 FSI V6 | 6,000 rpm | 2,500-5,000 rpm | 6,250 rpm |
Acceleration curve
Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.
| Metric | Alfa Romeo159 Sportwagon3.2 JTS V6 | SkodaSuperb II Combi3.6 FSI V6 |
|---|---|---|
| Acceleration checkpoints | ||
0-60 mph 0-97 km/h | 6.9 s | 6.3 s |
0-100 km/h 0-62 mph | 7.2 s | 6.6 s |
0-200 km/h 0-124 mph | 24.4 s | 23.0 s |
| Top speed | 248 km/h 154 mph | 247 km/h 153 mph |
| Drag race simulation | ||
60 ft 18 m | 2.7 s | 2.6 s |
330 ft 101 m | 6.8 s | 6.5 s |
1/8 mile 201 m | 10.0 s | 9.7 s |
1000 ft 305 m | 12.8 s | 12.3 s |
1/4 mile 402 m | 15.1 s | 14.6 s |
Trap speed 1/4 mile 402 m | 160 km/h 100 mph | 164 km/h 102 mph |
Power comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power. Higher is better · hp / kW
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Alfa Romeo159 Sportwagon3.2 JTS V6 | 260 hp 194 kW |
| SkodaSuperb II Combi3.6 FSI V6 | 260 hp 194 kW |
Torque comparison
Bar comparison chart for Torque. Higher is better · Nm / lb-ft
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Alfa Romeo159 Sportwagon3.2 JTS V6 | 322 Nm 237 lb-ft |
| SkodaSuperb II Combi3.6 FSI V6 | 350 Nm 258 lb-ft |
Curb weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Curb weight. Lower is better · kg / lb
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Alfa Romeo159 Sportwagon3.2 JTS V6 | 1,590 kg 3,505 lb |
| SkodaSuperb II Combi3.6 FSI V6 | 1,671 kg 3,684 lb |
Top speed without limiter comparison
Bar comparison chart for Top speed without limiter. Higher is better · km/h / mph
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Alfa Romeo159 Sportwagon3.2 JTS V6 | 248 km/h 154 mph |
| SkodaSuperb II Combi3.6 FSI V6 | 247 km/h 153 mph |
0-100 km/h comparison
Bar comparison chart for 0-100 km/h. Lower is better · seconds
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Alfa Romeo159 Sportwagon3.2 JTS V6 | 7.2 s |
| SkodaSuperb II Combi3.6 FSI V6 | 6.6 s |
The biggest 0-100 km/h difference is between Skoda Superb II Combi 3.6 FSI V6 and Alfa Romeo 159 Sportwagon 3.2 JTS V6: 0.6 s.
Fuel consumption comparison
Bar comparison chart for Fuel consumption. Lower is better · L/100 km / mpg US / mpg UK
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Alfa Romeo159 Sportwagon3.2 JTS V6 | 11.1 L/100 km 21.2 mpg US 25.4 mpg UK |
| SkodaSuperb II Combi3.6 FSI V6 | 10.2 L/100 km 23.1 mpg US 27.7 mpg UK |
The biggest fuel consumption difference is between Skoda Superb II Combi 3.6 FSI V6 and Alfa Romeo 159 Sportwagon 3.2 JTS V6: 0.9 L/100 km.
Power-to-weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power-to-weight. Higher is better · hp/t / kW/t
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Alfa Romeo159 Sportwagon3.2 JTS V6 | 164 hp/t 122 kW/t 6.1 kg/hp |
| SkodaSuperb II Combi3.6 FSI V6 | 156 hp/t 116 kW/t 6.4 kg/hp |
Estimated range comparison
Bar comparison chart for Estimated range. Higher is better · km / mi
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Alfa Romeo159 Sportwagon3.2 JTS V6 | 622 km 386 mi |
| SkodaSuperb II Combi3.6 FSI V6 | 588 km 366 mi |
Performance spider chart
Radar chart comparing normalized performance and fuel-consumption scores.
| Vehicle | Power | Acceleration | Top speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Alfa Romeo159 Sportwagon3.2 JTS V6 | 260 hp 194 kW | 7.2 s | 248 km/h 154 mph |
| SkodaSuperb II Combi3.6 FSI V6 | 260 hp 194 kW | 6.6 s | 247 km/h 153 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 | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alfa Romeo159 Sportwagon3.2 JTS V6 |
|
| ||||||||||||||
| SkodaSuperb II Combi3.6 FSI 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 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alfa Romeo159 Sportwagon3.2 JTS V6 |
| 11.1 L/100 km 21.2 mpg US 25.4 mpg UK | ||||||
| SkodaSuperb II Combi3.6 FSI V6 |
| 10.2 L/100 km 23.1 mpg US 27.7 mpg UK | ||||||
Skoda Superb II Combi 3.6 FSI 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Alfa Romeo159 Sportwagon3.2 JTS V6 | 11.1 L/100 km 21.2 mpg US 25.4 mpg UK | 7.2 s |
| SkodaSuperb II Combi3.6 FSI V6 | 10.2 L/100 km 23.1 mpg US 27.7 mpg UK | 6.6 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Alfa Romeo159 Sportwagon3.2 JTS V6 | 164 hp/t 122 kW/t 6.1 kg/hp | 11.1 L/100 km 21.2 mpg US 25.4 mpg UK |
| SkodaSuperb II Combi3.6 FSI V6 | 156 hp/t 116 kW/t 6.4 kg/hp | 10.2 L/100 km 23.1 mpg US 27.7 mpg UK |
Detailed score breakdown
| Vehicle | Alfa Romeo159 Sportwagon3.2 JTS V6 | SkodaSuperb II Combi3.6 FSI V6 | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power | 260 hp 194 kW | 260 hp 194 kW | ||||||||||||||||
| Torque | 322 Nm 237 lb-ft | 350 Nm 258 lb-ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Acceleration | 7.2 s | 6.6 s | ||||||||||||||||
| Top speed | 248 km/h 154 mph | 247 km/h 153 mph | ||||||||||||||||
| Lightness | 1,590 kg 3,505 lb | 1,671 kg 3,684 lb | ||||||||||||||||
| Fuel consumption | 11.1 L/100 km 21.2 mpg US 25.4 mpg UK | 10.2 L/100 km 23.1 mpg US 27.7 mpg UK | ||||||||||||||||
| Practicality |
|
| ||||||||||||||||
| Range score | 622 km 386 mi | 588 km 366 mi | ||||||||||||||||
| CO2 score | 262 g/km | - | ||||||||||||||||
| Trunk score | 445 L 15.7 cu ft | 633 L 22.4 cu ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Power-to-weight score | 164 hp/t 122 kW/t 6.1 kg/hp | 156 hp/t 116 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 | Alfa Romeo 159 Sportwagon 3.2 JTS V6 | Skoda Superb II Combi 3.6 FSI V6 |
|---|---|---|
| Consumption | 11.1 L/100 km21.2 mpg US25.4 mpg UK | 10.2 L/100 km23.1 mpg US27.7 mpg UK |
| Cost / 100 km | 19.43 LC100 km | 17.85 LC100 km |
| Cost / 100 mi | 31.26 LC100 mi | 28.73 LC100 mi |
| Annual fuel used | 1,665 L440 US gal366 UK gal | 1,530 L404 US gal337 UK gal |
| Annual fuel cost | 2,914 LC/year | 2,678 LC/year |
Head-to-head comparisons
Alfa Romeo 159 Sportwagon 3.2 JTS V6
- Is 81 kg lighter
- Has 1 km/h (1 mph) higher top speed
- Has 8 hp/t better power-to-weight
- Has 33 km (21 mi) more estimated range
Pros
- Highest top speed
- Most powerful
- Lightest
- Best power-to-weight ratio
- Best estimated range
Cons
- Slowest 0-100 km/h
- Highest combined fuel consumption
- Smallest trunk
Skoda Superb II Combi 3.6 FSI V6
- Has 28 Nm more
- Is 0.6 s quicker from 0-100 km/h
- Uses 0.9 L/100 km less fuel
- Has 188 L more trunk volume
Pros
- Quickest 0-100 km/h in this comparison
- Highest torque
- Lowest combined fuel consumption
- Largest trunk
Cons
- Heaviest
- Lowest top speed
Choose cars to compare
Popular comparisons























