Car comparison

Cadillac BLS Wagon 2.8 T V6vsVolvo XC70 II 3.0 T6

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 ccGasolineFWDAutomaticTurbochargedWagon / estate2007-2009
VS

Volvo XC70 II

3.0 T6

285 hp2953 ccGasolineAWDAutomaticTurbochargedWagon / estate2008-2010

Comparison overview

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

Best choices

Volvo XC70 II 3.0 T6

  • Quickest 0-100 km/h
    7.6 s
  • Most powerful
    285 hp
    213 kW
  • Highest torque
    400 Nm
    295 lb-ft
  • Best power-to-weight
    161 hp/t
    120 kW/t
    6.2 kg/hp
  • Lowest city consumption
    16.6 L/100 km
    14.2 mpg US
    17.0 mpg UK
  • Best estimated range
    609 km
    378 mi
  • Largest trunk
    575 L
  • Best overall score
    65/100
  • Best practicality score
    88/100

Cadillac BLS Wagon 2.8 T V6

  • Fastest top speed
    250 km/h
    155 mph Unrestricted
    240 km/h
    149 mph Restricted
  • Lightest
    1,630 kg
    3,594 lb
  • Lowest combined fuel consumption
    11.5 L/100 km
    20.5 mpg US
    24.6 mpg UK
  • Lowest highway consumption
    7.7 L/100 km
    30.5 mpg US
    36.7 mpg UK
  • Best performance score
    54/100
  • Best economy score
    76/100

Specification comparison

Specification comparison
ModelCadillacBLS Wagon2.8 T V6VolvoXC70 II3.0 T6
Power
255hp190kW
285hp213kW
Torque
350Nm258lb-ft
400Nm295lb-ft
Curb weight
1,630kg3,594lb
1,769kg3,900lb
Gross weight
2,170kg4,784lb
2,400kg5,291lb
Top speed
Unrestricted
250 km/h155 mph
Restricted
240 km/h149 mph
Calculated
Unrestricted
220 km/h137 mph
Restricted
210 km/h130 mph
Calculated
To 99% top speed
85.1s99% target: 248 km/h / 154 mph
Calculated
69.2s99% target: 218 km/h / 135 mph
Calculated
0-100 km/h
8.0s
7.6s
0-200 km/h
27.5s
Calculated
34.0s
Calculated
0-60 mph
7.6s
Calculated
7.2s
Calculated
Fuel consumption
11.5L/100 km20.5mpg US24.6mpg UK
11.5L/100 km20.5mpg US24.6mpg UK
Fuel consumption city
18L/100 km13.1mpg US15.7mpg UK
16.6L/100 km14.2mpg US17.0mpg UK
Fuel consumption highway
7.7L/100 km30.5mpg US36.7mpg UK
8.5L/100 km27.7mpg US33.2mpg UK
Quarter mile
15.7s
Calculated
15.5s
Calculated
Power-to-weight
156hp/t117kW/t71hp/1000 lb
Calculated
161hp/t120kW/t73hp/1000 lb
Calculated
Torque-to-weight
215Nm/t144lb-ft/ton
Calculated
226Nm/t151lb-ft/ton
Calculated
Estimated range
504km313mi
Calculated
609km378mi
Calculated
Displacement
2,792cc170cu in
2,953cc180cu in
Length
4,716mm186in
4,838mm190in
Width
1,802mm71in
1,861mm73in
Height
1,543mm61in
1,604mm63in
Wheelbase
2,675mm105in
2,815mm111in
Front track
1,524mm60in
1,614mm64in
Rear track
1,506mm59in
1,580mm62in
Ground clearance
127mm5in
210mm8in
Trunk volume
419L
575L
Max trunk volume
1,273L
1,600L
Doors
5
5
Seats
5
5
Fuel tank
58L
70L
CO2 emissions-
269g/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 V6Volvo XC70 II 3.0 T6PowerTorque
  • Cadillac BLS Wagon 2.8 T V6: Power / Torque
  • Volvo XC70 II 3.0 T6: 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
VolvoXC70 II3.0 T65,950 rpm1,500-4,800 rpm6,200 rpm

Acceleration curve

Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.

Acceleration and drag-race table
MetricCadillacBLS Wagon2.8 T V6VolvoXC70 II3.0 T6
Acceleration checkpoints
0-60 mph
0-97 km/h
7.6 s
7.2 s
0-100 km/h
0-62 mph
8.0 s
7.6 s
0-200 km/h
0-124 mph
27.5 s
34.0 s
Top speed
Unrestricted
250 km/h155 mph
Restricted
240 km/h149 mph
Likely limited
Unrestricted
220 km/h137 mph
Restricted
210 km/h130 mph
Likely limited
Drag race simulation
60 ft
18 m
2.8 s
2.7 s
330 ft
101 m
7.1 s
6.9 s
1/8 mile
201 m
10.5 s
10.2 s
1000 ft
305 m
13.4 s
13.1 s
1/4 mile
402 m
15.7 s
15.5 s
Trap speed
1/4 mile
402 m
154 km/h
96 mph
151 km/h
94 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
VolvoXC70 II3.0 T6
285 hp
213 kW

Volvo XC70 II 3.0 T6 has 30 hp more than Cadillac BLS Wagon 2.8 T V6.

The biggest power difference is between Cadillac BLS Wagon 2.8 T V6 and Volvo XC70 II 3.0 T6: 30 hp (22 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
VolvoXC70 II3.0 T6
400 Nm
295 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
1,630 kg
3,594 lb
VolvoXC70 II3.0 T6
1,769 kg
3,900 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
VolvoXC70 II3.0 T6
Unrestricted
220 km/h137 mph
Restricted
210 km/h130 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 V68.0 s
VolvoXC70 II3.0 T67.6 s

The biggest 0-100 km/h difference is between Volvo XC70 II 3.0 T6 and Cadillac BLS Wagon 2.8 T V6: 0.4 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
11.5 L/100 km
20.5 mpg US
24.6 mpg UK
VolvoXC70 II3.0 T6
11.5 L/100 km
20.5 mpg US
24.6 mpg UK

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
156 hp/t
117 kW/t
6.4 kg/hp
VolvoXC70 II3.0 T6
161 hp/t
120 kW/t
6.2 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
504 km
313 mi
VolvoXC70 II3.0 T6
609 km
378 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
8.0 s
Unrestricted
250 km/h155 mph
Restricted
240 km/h149 mph
VolvoXC70 II3.0 T6
285 hp
213 kW
7.6 s
Unrestricted
220 km/h137 mph
Restricted
210 km/h130 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/h8.0 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
VolvoXC70 II3.0 T6
Power
285 hp
213 kW
0-100 km/h7.6 s
Top speed
Unrestricted
220 km/h137 mph
Restricted
210 km/h130 mph
Doors/seats
5 doors
5 seats
Trunk
575 L
20.3 cu ft
Length
4,838 mm
190.5 in
Height
1,604 mm
63.1 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/h8.0 s
Top speed
Unrestricted
250 km/h155 mph
Restricted
240 km/h149 mph
11.5 L/100 km
20.5 mpg US
24.6 mpg UK
VolvoXC70 II3.0 T6
Power
285 hp
213 kW
0-100 km/h7.6 s
Top speed
Unrestricted
220 km/h137 mph
Restricted
210 km/h130 mph
11.5 L/100 km
20.5 mpg US
24.6 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
11.5 L/100 km
20.5 mpg US
24.6 mpg UK
8.0 s
VolvoXC70 II3.0 T6
11.5 L/100 km
20.5 mpg US
24.6 mpg UK
7.6 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
156 hp/t
117 kW/t
6.4 kg/hp
11.5 L/100 km
20.5 mpg US
24.6 mpg UK
VolvoXC70 II3.0 T6
161 hp/t
120 kW/t
6.2 kg/hp
11.5 L/100 km
20.5 mpg US
24.6 mpg UK

Detailed score breakdown

Detailed score breakdown
VehicleCadillacBLS Wagon2.8 T V6VolvoXC70 II3.0 T6
Power
255 hp
190 kW
285 hp
213 kW
Torque
350 Nm
258 lb-ft
400 Nm
295 lb-ft
Acceleration
8.0 s
7.6 s
Top speed
Unrestricted
250 km/h155 mph
Restricted
240 km/h149 mph
Unrestricted
220 km/h137 mph
Restricted
210 km/h130 mph
Lightness
1,630 kg
3,594 lb
1,769 kg
3,900 lb
Fuel consumption
11.5 L/100 km
20.5 mpg US
24.6 mpg UK
11.5 L/100 km
20.5 mpg US
24.6 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
575 L
20.3 cu ft
Length
4,838 mm
190.5 in
Height
1,604 mm
63.1 in
Range score
504 km
313 mi
609 km
378 mi
CO2 score
-
269 g/km
Trunk score
419 L
14.8 cu ft
575 L
20.3 cu ft
Power-to-weight score
156 hp/t
117 kW/t
6.4 kg/hp
161 hp/t
120 kW/t
6.2 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 V6Volvo XC70 II 3.0 T6
Consumption11.5 L/100 km20.5 mpg US24.6 mpg UK11.5 L/100 km20.5 mpg US24.6 mpg UK
Cost / 100 km20.13 LC100 km20.13 LC100 km
Cost / 100 mi32.39 LC100 mi32.39 LC100 mi
Annual fuel used1,725 L456 US gal379 UK gal1,725 L456 US gal379 UK gal
Annual fuel cost3,019 LC/year3,019 LC/year

Head-to-head comparisons

Cadillac BLS Wagon 2.8 T V6

  • Is 139 kg lighter
  • Has 30 km/h (19 mph) higher top speed

Pros

  • Highest top speed
  • Lightest
  • Lowest combined fuel consumption

Cons

  • Slowest 0-100 km/h
  • Lowest power
  • Smallest trunk

Volvo XC70 II 3.0 T6

  • Has 30 hp more
  • Has 50 Nm more
  • Is 0.4 s quicker from 0-100 km/h
  • Has 5 hp/t better power-to-weight
  • Has 104 km (65 mi) more estimated range
  • Has 156 L more trunk volume

Pros

  • Quickest 0-100 km/h in this comparison
  • Most powerful
  • Highest torque
  • Best power-to-weight ratio
  • Best estimated range
  • Largest trunk

Cons

  • Heaviest
  • Lowest top speed

Choose cars to compare

Brand
Model
Generation
Engine or modification
Cadillac BLS Wagon 2.8 T V6
Volvo XC70 II 3.0 T6
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
3.0 T6
3.0 T6
VS
VolvoXC70 II3.0 T6vsVolvoXC70 IIFacelift 20133.0 T6
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
3.0 T6
2.5 T5
VS
VolvoXC70 II3.0 T6vsVolvoV50Facelift 20072.5 T5
2.8 T V6
3.2 JTS V6
VS
CadillacBLS Wagon2.8 T V6vsAlfa Romeo159 Sportwagon3.2 JTS V6
3.0 T6
3.0 T6
VS
VolvoXC70 II3.0 T6vsVolvoV70 III3.0 T6
2.8 T V6
3.2 FSI V6
VS
CadillacBLS Wagon2.8 T V6vsAUDIA6 allroad (4F/C6)3.2 FSI V6
3.0 T6
2.4i 20V T5
VS
VolvoXC70 II3.0 T6vsVolvoV70 IIFacelift 20042.4i 20V T5
2.8 T V6
3.2 FSI V6
VS
CadillacBLS Wagon2.8 T V6vsAUDIA6 Avant (4F/C6)3.2 FSI V6
3.0 T6
2.5 T5
VS
VolvoXC70 II3.0 T6vsVolvoV502.5 T5
3.0 T6
R 2.5i V20
VS
VolvoXC70 II3.0 T6vsVolvoV70 IIR 2.5i V20
2.8 T V6
330xi
VS
CadillacBLS Wagon2.8 T V6vsBMW3 Series Touring (E91)330xi
Cadillac BLS Wagon 2.8 T V6 vs Volvo XC70 II 3.0 T6 - car comparison - FastVsFaster