Car comparison

Cadillac ATS Sedan V 3.6 V6vsBentley Mulsanne EWB 6.75 V8

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

New comparison

Cadillac ATS Sedan

V 3.6 V6

471 hp3564 ccGasolineRWDManualTwin-turboSedan2016-2019
VS

Bentley Mulsanne EWB

6.75 V8

512 hp6752 ccGasolineRWDAutomaticTwin-turboSedan2016-2020

Comparison overview

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

Best choices

Cadillac ATS Sedan V 3.6 V6

  • Quickest 0-100 km/h
    4.2 s
  • Fastest top speed
    298 km/h
    185 mph
  • Lightest
    1,729 kg
    3,812 lb
  • Best power-to-weight
    272 hp/t
    203 kW/t
    3.7 kg/hp
  • Lowest combined fuel consumption
    12.4 L/100 km
    19.0 mpg US
    22.8 mpg UK
  • Lowest city consumption
    13.8 L/100 km
    17.0 mpg US
    20.5 mpg UK
  • Best overall score
    79/100
  • Best performance score
    84/100
  • Best economy score
    74/100

Bentley Mulsanne EWB 6.75 V8

  • Most powerful
    512 hp
    382 kW
  • Highest torque
    1,020 Nm
    752 lb-ft
  • Lowest highway consumption
    9.9 L/100 km
    23.8 mpg US
    28.5 mpg UK
  • Best estimated range
    658 km
    409 mi
  • Largest trunk
    446 L
  • Best practicality score
    71/100

Specification comparison

Specification comparison
ModelCadillacATS SedanV 3.6 V6BentleyMulsanne EWB6.75 V8
Power
471hp351kW
512hp382kW
Torque
603Nm445lb-ft
1,020Nm752lb-ft
Curb weight
1,729kg3,812lb
2,730kg6,019lb
Gross weight-
3,200kg7,055lb
Top speed
298 km/h
185 mph
296 km/h
184 mph
To 99% top speed
44.7s99% target: 295 km/h / 183 mph
Calculated
67.1s99% target: 293 km/h / 182 mph
Calculated
0-100 km/h
4.2s
5.5s
0-200 km/h
11.2s
Calculated
15.6s
Calculated
0-60 mph
4.0s
Calculated
5.3s
Calculated
Fuel consumption
12.4L/100 km19mpg US22.8mpg UK
14.6L/100 km16.1mpg US19.3mpg UK
Fuel consumption city
13.8L/100 km17mpg US20.5mpg UK
22.8L/100 km10.3mpg US12.4mpg UK
Fuel consumption highway
10.2L/100 km23.1mpg US27.7mpg UK
9.9L/100 km23.8mpg US28.5mpg UK
Quarter mile
11.9s
Calculated
13.4s
Calculated
Power-to-weight
272hp/t203kW/t124hp/1000 lb
Calculated
188hp/t140kW/t85hp/1000 lb
Calculated
Torque-to-weight
349Nm/t233lb-ft/ton
Calculated
374Nm/t250lb-ft/ton
Calculated
Estimated range
488km303mi
Calculated
658km409mi
Calculated
Displacement
3,564cc217cu in
6,752cc412cu in
Length
4,673mm184in
5,825mm229in
Width
1,811mm71in
-
Height
1,415mm56in
1,541mm61in
Wheelbase
2,775mm109in
3,516mm138in
Front track
1,538mm61in
1,605mm63in
Rear track
1,536mm60in
1,651mm65in
Trunk volume
295L
446L
Doors
4
4
Seats
5
4
Fuel tank
61L
96L
CO2 emissions-
344g/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 ATS Sedan V 3.6 V6Bentley Mulsanne EWB 6.75 V8PowerTorque
  • Cadillac ATS Sedan V 3.6 V6: Power / Torque
  • Bentley Mulsanne EWB 6.75 V8: Power / Torque
Dyno simulation data table
VehiclePeak power RPMPeak torque RPMMax engine speed
CadillacATS SedanV 3.6 V65,850 rpm3,500 rpm6,500 rpm
BentleyMulsanne EWB6.75 V84,000 rpm1,750 rpm4,250 rpm

Acceleration curve

Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.

Acceleration and drag-race table
MetricCadillacATS SedanV 3.6 V6BentleyMulsanne EWB6.75 V8
Acceleration checkpoints
0-60 mph
0-97 km/h
4.0 s
5.3 s
0-100 km/h
0-62 mph
4.2 s
5.5 s
0-200 km/h
0-124 mph
11.2 s
15.6 s
Top speed
298 km/h
185 mph
296 km/h
184 mph
Drag race simulation
60 ft
18 m
2.2 s
2.5 s
330 ft
101 m
5.5 s
6.1 s
1/8 mile
201 m
8.0 s
9.0 s
1000 ft
305 m
10.1 s
11.4 s
1/4 mile
402 m
11.9 s
13.4 s
Trap speed
1/4 mile
402 m
207 km/h
129 mph
184 km/h
114 mph

Power comparison

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

Chart data table
VehicleValue
CadillacATS SedanV 3.6 V6
471 hp
351 kW
BentleyMulsanne EWB6.75 V8
512 hp
382 kW

Bentley Mulsanne EWB 6.75 V8 has 41 hp more than Cadillac ATS Sedan V 3.6 V6.

The biggest power difference is between Cadillac ATS Sedan V 3.6 V6 and Bentley Mulsanne EWB 6.75 V8: 41 hp (31 kW).

Torque comparison

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

Chart data table
VehicleValue
CadillacATS SedanV 3.6 V6
603 Nm
445 lb-ft
BentleyMulsanne EWB6.75 V8
1,020 Nm
752 lb-ft

Curb weight comparison

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

Chart data table
VehicleValue
CadillacATS SedanV 3.6 V6
1,729 kg
3,812 lb
BentleyMulsanne EWB6.75 V8
2,730 kg
6,019 lb

Top speed without limiter comparison

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

Chart data table
VehicleValue
CadillacATS SedanV 3.6 V6
298 km/h
185 mph
BentleyMulsanne EWB6.75 V8
296 km/h
184 mph

0-100 km/h comparison

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

Chart data table
VehicleValue
CadillacATS SedanV 3.6 V64.2 s
BentleyMulsanne EWB6.75 V85.5 s

Although Bentley Mulsanne EWB 6.75 V8 has more power, Cadillac ATS Sedan V 3.6 V6 is quicker from 0-100 km/h.

The biggest 0-100 km/h difference is between Cadillac ATS Sedan V 3.6 V6 and Bentley Mulsanne EWB 6.75 V8: 1.3 s.

Fuel consumption comparison

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

Chart data table
VehicleValue
CadillacATS SedanV 3.6 V6
12.4 L/100 km
19.0 mpg US
22.8 mpg UK
BentleyMulsanne EWB6.75 V8
14.6 L/100 km
16.1 mpg US
19.3 mpg UK

The biggest fuel consumption difference is between Cadillac ATS Sedan V 3.6 V6 and Bentley Mulsanne EWB 6.75 V8: 2.2 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
CadillacATS SedanV 3.6 V6
272 hp/t
203 kW/t
3.7 kg/hp
BentleyMulsanne EWB6.75 V8
188 hp/t
140 kW/t
5.3 kg/hp

Estimated range comparison

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

Chart data table
VehicleValue
CadillacATS SedanV 3.6 V6
488 km
303 mi
BentleyMulsanne EWB6.75 V8
658 km
409 mi

Performance spider chart

Radar chart comparing normalized performance and fuel-consumption scores.

Chart data table
VehiclePowerAccelerationTop speed
CadillacATS SedanV 3.6 V6
471 hp
351 kW
4.2 s
298 km/h
185 mph
BentleyMulsanne EWB6.75 V8
512 hp
382 kW
5.5 s
296 km/h
184 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
CadillacATS SedanV 3.6 V6
Power
471 hp
351 kW
0-100 km/h4.2 s
Top speed
298 km/h
185 mph
Doors/seats
4 doors
5 seats
Trunk
295 L
10.4 cu ft
Length
4,673 mm
184.0 in
Height
1,415 mm
55.7 in
BentleyMulsanne EWB6.75 V8
Power
512 hp
382 kW
0-100 km/h5.5 s
Top speed
296 km/h
184 mph
Doors/seats
4 doors
4 seats
Trunk
446 L
15.8 cu ft
Length
5,825 mm
229.3 in
Height
1,541 mm
60.7 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
CadillacATS SedanV 3.6 V6
Power
471 hp
351 kW
0-100 km/h4.2 s
Top speed
298 km/h
185 mph
12.4 L/100 km
19.0 mpg US
22.8 mpg UK
BentleyMulsanne EWB6.75 V8
Power
512 hp
382 kW
0-100 km/h5.5 s
Top speed
296 km/h
184 mph
14.6 L/100 km
16.1 mpg US
19.3 mpg UK

Cadillac ATS Sedan V 3.6 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
CadillacATS SedanV 3.6 V6
12.4 L/100 km
19.0 mpg US
22.8 mpg UK
4.2 s
BentleyMulsanne EWB6.75 V8
14.6 L/100 km
16.1 mpg US
19.3 mpg UK
5.5 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
CadillacATS SedanV 3.6 V6
272 hp/t
203 kW/t
3.7 kg/hp
12.4 L/100 km
19.0 mpg US
22.8 mpg UK
BentleyMulsanne EWB6.75 V8
188 hp/t
140 kW/t
5.3 kg/hp
14.6 L/100 km
16.1 mpg US
19.3 mpg UK

Detailed score breakdown

Detailed score breakdown
VehicleCadillacATS SedanV 3.6 V6BentleyMulsanne EWB6.75 V8
Power
471 hp
351 kW
512 hp
382 kW
Torque
603 Nm
445 lb-ft
1,020 Nm
752 lb-ft
Acceleration
4.2 s
5.5 s
Top speed
298 km/h
185 mph
296 km/h
184 mph
Lightness
1,729 kg
3,812 lb
2,730 kg
6,019 lb
Fuel consumption
12.4 L/100 km
19.0 mpg US
22.8 mpg UK
14.6 L/100 km
16.1 mpg US
19.3 mpg UK
Practicality
Doors/seats
4 doors
5 seats
Trunk
295 L
10.4 cu ft
Length
4,673 mm
184.0 in
Height
1,415 mm
55.7 in
Doors/seats
4 doors
4 seats
Trunk
446 L
15.8 cu ft
Length
5,825 mm
229.3 in
Height
1,541 mm
60.7 in
Range score
488 km
303 mi
658 km
409 mi
CO2 score
-
344 g/km
Trunk score
295 L
10.4 cu ft
446 L
15.8 cu ft
Power-to-weight score
272 hp/t
203 kW/t
3.7 kg/hp
188 hp/t
140 kW/t
5.3 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 ATS Sedan V 3.6 V6Bentley Mulsanne EWB 6.75 V8
Consumption12.4 L/100 km19 mpg US22.8 mpg UK14.6 L/100 km16.1 mpg US19.3 mpg UK
Cost / 100 km21.70 LC100 km25.55 LC100 km
Cost / 100 mi34.92 LC100 mi41.12 LC100 mi
Annual fuel used1,860 L491 US gal409 UK gal2,190 L579 US gal482 UK gal
Annual fuel cost3,255 LC/year3,833 LC/year

Head-to-head comparisons

Cadillac ATS Sedan V 3.6 V6

  • Is 1,001 kg lighter
  • Is 1.3 s quicker from 0-100 km/h
  • Has 2 km/h (1 mph) higher top speed
  • Uses 2.2 L/100 km less fuel
  • Has 85 hp/t better power-to-weight

Pros

  • Quickest 0-100 km/h in this comparison
  • Highest top speed
  • Lightest
  • Lowest combined fuel consumption
  • Best power-to-weight ratio

Cons

  • Lowest power
  • Smallest trunk

Bentley Mulsanne EWB 6.75 V8

  • Has 41 hp more
  • Has 417 Nm more
  • Has 170 km (105 mi) more estimated range
  • Has 151 L more trunk volume

Pros

  • Most powerful
  • Highest torque
  • Best estimated range
  • Largest trunk

Cons

  • Slowest 0-100 km/h
  • Highest combined fuel consumption
  • Heaviest
  • Lowest top speed

Choose cars to compare

Brand
Model
Generation
Engine or modification
Cadillac ATS Sedan V 3.6 V6
Bentley Mulsanne EWB 6.75 V8
Compare selected cars
2 vehicles selected

Popular comparisons

V 3.6 V6
V 3.6 V6
VS
CadillacATS SedanV 3.6 V6vsCadillacATS CoupeV 3.6 V6
6.75 V8
6.75 V8
VS
BentleyMulsanne EWB6.75 V8vsBentleyMulsanne IIFacelift 20166.75 V8
V 3.6 V6
CS 3.0
VS
CadillacATS SedanV 3.6 V6vsBMWM3 (F80)CS 3.0
6.75 V8
6.75 V8
VS
BentleyMulsanne EWB6.75 V8vsBentleyMulsanne II6.75 V8
V 3.6 V6
F 5.0 V8
VS
CadillacATS SedanV 3.6 V6vsLexusGS IVFacelift 2015F 5.0 V8
6.75 V8
4.0 V8
VS
BentleyMulsanne EWB6.75 V8vsBentleyFlying Spur IIFacelift 20154.0 V8
V 3.6 V6
V 6.2 V8
VS
CadillacATS SedanV 3.6 V6vsCadillacCTS IIIV 6.2 V8
6.75 V8
4.0 V8
VS
BentleyMulsanne EWB6.75 V8vsBentleyFlying Spur II4.0 V8
V 3.6 V6
AMG C 63 V8
VS
CadillacATS SedanV 3.6 V6vsMercedes-BenzC-class (W205)AMG C 63 V8
6.75 V8
4.0 V8
VS
BentleyMulsanne EWB6.75 V8vsBentleyFlying Spur III4.0 V8
V 3.6 V6
S 3.0 V6
VS
CadillacATS SedanV 3.6 V6vsMaseratiGhibli III (M157)Facelift 2017S 3.0 V6
6.75 V8
6.8i V8 Biturbo
VS
BentleyMulsanne EWB6.75 V8vsBentleyArnage T6.8i V8 Biturbo
Cadillac ATS Sedan V 3.6 V6 vs Bentley Mulsanne EWB 6.75 V8 - car comparison - FastVsFaster