Cadillac BLS Wagon
Car comparison
Cadillac BLS Wagon 2.0 TvsRenault Laguna III Grandtour 2.0 dCi FAP
Compare specs, acceleration, fuel consumption, dimensions, practicality, and estimated running costs side by side.
New comparisonRenault Laguna III Grandtour
2.0 dCi FAP
Comparison overview
Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.
Best choices
Renault Laguna III Grandtour 2.0 dCi FAP
- Highest torque380 Nm280 lb-ft
- Lowest combined fuel consumption6.7 L/100 km35.1 mpg US42.2 mpg UK
- Lowest city consumption8.8 L/100 km26.7 mpg US32.1 mpg UK
- Lowest highway consumption5.7 L/100 km41.3 mpg US49.6 mpg UK
- Best estimated range985 km612 mi
- Largest trunk508 L
- Best economy score89/100
- Best practicality score84/100
Cadillac BLS Wagon 2.0 T
- Quickest 0-100 km/h8.2 s
- Fastest top speed225 km/h140 mph
- Most powerful200 hp149 kW
- Lightest1,510 kg3,329 lb
- Best power-to-weight132 hp/t99 kW/t7.6 kg/hp
- Best overall score59/100
- Best performance score48/100
Specification comparison
| Model | CadillacBLS Wagon2.0 T | RenaultLaguna III Grandtour2.0 dCi FAP |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 200hp149kW | 178hp133kW |
| Torque | 300Nm221lb-ft | 380Nm280lb-ft |
| Curb weight | 1,510kg3,329lb | 1,613kg3,556lb |
| Gross weight | 2,070kg4,564lb | 2,055kg4,530lb |
| Top speed | 225 km/h 140 mph | 213 km/h 132 mph |
| To 99% top speed | 77.6s99% target: 223 km/h / 138 mph Calculated | 77.3s99% target: 211 km/h / 131 mph Calculated |
| 0-100 km/h | 8.2s | 8.7s |
| 0-200 km/h | 34.6s Calculated | 44.6s Calculated |
| 0-60 mph | 7.8s Calculated | 8.3s Calculated |
| Fuel consumption | 8.3L/100 km28.3mpg US34.0mpg UK | 6.7L/100 km35.1mpg US42.2mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption city | 11.5L/100 km20.5mpg US24.6mpg UK | 8.8L/100 km26.7mpg US32.1mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption highway | 6.4L/100 km36.8mpg US44.1mpg UK | 5.7L/100 km41.3mpg US49.6mpg UK |
| Quarter mile | 15.9s Calculated | 16.3s Calculated |
| Power-to-weight | 132hp/t99kW/t60hp/1000 lb Calculated | 110hp/t82kW/t50hp/1000 lb Calculated |
| Torque-to-weight | 199Nm/t133lb-ft/ton Calculated | 236Nm/t158lb-ft/ton Calculated |
| Estimated range | 699km434mi Calculated | 985km612mi Calculated |
| Displacement | 1,998cc122cu in | 1,995cc122cu in |
| Length | 4,716mm186in | 4,803mm189in |
| Width | 1,802mm71in | 1,811mm71in |
| Height | 1,543mm61in | 1,445mm57in |
| Wheelbase | 2,675mm105in | 2,756mm109in |
| Front track | 1,524mm60in | - |
| Rear track | 1,506mm59in | - |
| Ground clearance | 127mm5in | - |
| Trunk volume | 419L | 508L |
| Max trunk volume | 1,273L | - |
| Doors | 5 | 5 |
| Seats | 5 | 5 |
| Fuel tank | 58L | 66L |
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 2.0 T: Power / Torque
- Renault Laguna III Grandtour 2.0 dCi FAP: Power / Torque
| Vehicle | Peak power RPM | Peak torque RPM | Max engine speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| CadillacBLS Wagon2.0 T | 5,500 rpm | 2,500-4,000 rpm | 5,750 rpm |
| RenaultLaguna III Grandtour2.0 dCi FAP | 3,750 rpm | 2,000 rpm | 4,000 rpm |
Acceleration curve
Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.
| Metric | CadillacBLS Wagon2.0 T | RenaultLaguna III Grandtour2.0 dCi FAP |
|---|---|---|
| Acceleration checkpoints | ||
0-60 mph 0-97 km/h | 7.8 s | 8.3 s |
0-100 km/h 0-62 mph | 8.2 s | 8.7 s |
0-200 km/h 0-124 mph | 34.6 s | 44.6 s |
| Top speed | 225 km/h 140 mph | 213 km/h 132 mph |
| Drag race simulation | ||
60 ft 18 m | 2.8 s | 2.8 s |
330 ft 101 m | 7.1 s | 7.2 s |
1/8 mile 201 m | 10.5 s | 10.8 s |
1000 ft 305 m | 13.5 s | 13.8 s |
1/4 mile 402 m | 15.9 s | 16.3 s |
Trap speed 1/4 mile 402 m | 149 km/h 92 mph | 144 km/h 89 mph |
Power comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power. Higher is better · hp / kW
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| CadillacBLS Wagon2.0 T | 200 hp 149 kW |
| RenaultLaguna III Grandtour2.0 dCi FAP | 178 hp 133 kW |
Cadillac BLS Wagon 2.0 T has 22 hp more than Renault Laguna III Grandtour 2.0 dCi FAP.
The biggest power difference is between Renault Laguna III Grandtour 2.0 dCi FAP and Cadillac BLS Wagon 2.0 T: 22 hp (16 kW).
Torque comparison
Bar comparison chart for Torque. Higher is better · Nm / lb-ft
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| CadillacBLS Wagon2.0 T | 300 Nm 221 lb-ft |
| RenaultLaguna III Grandtour2.0 dCi FAP | 380 Nm 280 lb-ft |
Curb weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Curb weight. Lower is better · kg / lb
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| CadillacBLS Wagon2.0 T | 1,510 kg 3,329 lb |
| RenaultLaguna III Grandtour2.0 dCi FAP | 1,613 kg 3,556 lb |
Top speed without limiter comparison
Bar comparison chart for Top speed without limiter. Higher is better · km/h / mph
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| CadillacBLS Wagon2.0 T | 225 km/h 140 mph |
| RenaultLaguna III Grandtour2.0 dCi FAP | 213 km/h 132 mph |
0-100 km/h comparison
Bar comparison chart for 0-100 km/h. Lower is better · seconds
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| CadillacBLS Wagon2.0 T | 8.2 s |
| RenaultLaguna III Grandtour2.0 dCi FAP | 8.7 s |
The biggest 0-100 km/h difference is between Cadillac BLS Wagon 2.0 T and Renault Laguna III Grandtour 2.0 dCi FAP: 0.5 s.
Fuel consumption comparison
Bar comparison chart for Fuel consumption. Lower is better · L/100 km / mpg US / mpg UK
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| CadillacBLS Wagon2.0 T | 8.3 L/100 km 28.3 mpg US 34.0 mpg UK |
| RenaultLaguna III Grandtour2.0 dCi FAP | 6.7 L/100 km 35.1 mpg US 42.2 mpg UK |
The biggest fuel consumption difference is between Renault Laguna III Grandtour 2.0 dCi FAP and Cadillac BLS Wagon 2.0 T: 1.6 L/100 km.
Power-to-weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power-to-weight. Higher is better · hp/t / kW/t
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| CadillacBLS Wagon2.0 T | 132 hp/t 99 kW/t 7.5 kg/hp |
| RenaultLaguna III Grandtour2.0 dCi FAP | 110 hp/t 82 kW/t 9.1 kg/hp |
Estimated range comparison
Bar comparison chart for Estimated range. Higher is better · km / mi
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| CadillacBLS Wagon2.0 T | 699 km 434 mi |
| RenaultLaguna III Grandtour2.0 dCi FAP | 985 km 612 mi |
Performance spider chart
Radar chart comparing normalized performance and fuel-consumption scores.
| Vehicle | Power | Acceleration | Top speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| CadillacBLS Wagon2.0 T | 200 hp 149 kW | 8.2 s | 225 km/h 140 mph |
| RenaultLaguna III Grandtour2.0 dCi FAP | 178 hp 133 kW | 8.7 s | 213 km/h 132 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 Wagon2.0 T |
|
| ||||||||||||||
| RenaultLaguna III Grandtour2.0 dCi FAP |
|
| ||||||||||||||
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 Wagon2.0 T |
| 8.3 L/100 km 28.3 mpg US 34.0 mpg UK | ||||||
| RenaultLaguna III Grandtour2.0 dCi FAP |
| 6.7 L/100 km 35.1 mpg US 42.2 mpg UK | ||||||
Cadillac BLS Wagon 2.0 T 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 Wagon2.0 T | 8.3 L/100 km 28.3 mpg US 34.0 mpg UK | 8.2 s |
| RenaultLaguna III Grandtour2.0 dCi FAP | 6.7 L/100 km 35.1 mpg US 42.2 mpg UK | 8.7 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 Wagon2.0 T | 132 hp/t 99 kW/t 7.6 kg/hp | 8.3 L/100 km 28.3 mpg US 34.0 mpg UK |
| RenaultLaguna III Grandtour2.0 dCi FAP | 110 hp/t 82 kW/t 9.1 kg/hp | 6.7 L/100 km 35.1 mpg US 42.2 mpg UK |
Detailed score breakdown
| Vehicle | CadillacBLS Wagon2.0 T | RenaultLaguna III Grandtour2.0 dCi FAP | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power | 200 hp 149 kW | 178 hp 133 kW | ||||||||||||||||
| Torque | 300 Nm 221 lb-ft | 380 Nm 280 lb-ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Acceleration | 8.2 s | 8.7 s | ||||||||||||||||
| Top speed | 225 km/h 140 mph | 213 km/h 132 mph | ||||||||||||||||
| Lightness | 1,510 kg 3,329 lb | 1,613 kg 3,556 lb | ||||||||||||||||
| Fuel consumption | 8.3 L/100 km 28.3 mpg US 34.0 mpg UK | 6.7 L/100 km 35.1 mpg US 42.2 mpg UK | ||||||||||||||||
| Practicality |
|
| ||||||||||||||||
| Range score | 699 km 434 mi | 985 km 612 mi | ||||||||||||||||
| Trunk score | 419 L 14.8 cu ft | 508 L 17.9 cu ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Power-to-weight score | 132 hp/t 99 kW/t 7.6 kg/hp | 110 hp/t 82 kW/t 9.1 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 2.0 T | Renault Laguna III Grandtour 2.0 dCi FAP |
|---|---|---|
| Consumption | 8.3 L/100 km28.3 mpg US34 mpg UK | 6.7 L/100 km35.1 mpg US42.2 mpg UK |
| Cost / 100 km | 14.53 LC100 km | 11.73 LC100 km |
| Cost / 100 mi | 23.38 LC100 mi | 18.87 LC100 mi |
| Annual fuel used | 1,245 L329 US gal274 UK gal | 1,005 L265 US gal221 UK gal |
| Annual fuel cost | 2,179 LC/year | 1,759 LC/year |
Head-to-head comparisons
Cadillac BLS Wagon 2.0 T
- Has 22 hp more
- Is 103 kg lighter
- Is 0.5 s quicker from 0-100 km/h
- Has 12 km/h (7 mph) higher top speed
- Has 22 hp/t better power-to-weight
Pros
- Quickest 0-100 km/h in this comparison
- Highest top speed
- Most powerful
- Lightest
- Best power-to-weight ratio
Cons
- Highest combined fuel consumption
- Smallest trunk
Renault Laguna III Grandtour 2.0 dCi FAP
- Has 80 Nm more
- Uses 1.6 L/100 km less fuel
- Has 286 km (178 mi) more estimated range
- Has 89 L more trunk volume
Pros
- Highest torque
- Lowest combined fuel consumption
- Best estimated range
- Largest trunk
Cons
- Slowest 0-100 km/h
- Lowest power
- Heaviest
- Lowest top speed
Choose cars to compare
Popular comparisons























