2000 Mercury Sable vs. 2010 Cadillac BLS
To start off, 2010 Cadillac BLS is newer by 10 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2000 Mercury Sable. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2000 Mercury Sable would be higher. At 3,001 cc (6 cylinders), 2000 Mercury Sable is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2010 Cadillac BLS weights approximately 61 kg more than 2000 Mercury Sable.
Both vehicles are front wheel drive (FWD). Which offers better traction when its slippery than rear wheel drive vehicles. With that said, do keep in mind that many other factors such as speed and the wear on your tires can also have significant impact on traction and control. Let's talk about torque, 2010 Cadillac BLS (320 Nm) has 72 more torque (in Nm) than 2000 Mercury Sable. (248 Nm). This means 2010 Cadillac BLS will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2000 Mercury Sable.
Compare all specifications:
| 2000 Mercury Sable | 2010 Cadillac BLS | |
| Make | Mercury | Cadillac |
| Model | Sable | BLS |
| Year Released | 2000 | 2010 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3001 cc | 1910 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 148 HP |
| Torque | 248 Nm | 320 Nm |
| Drive Type | Front | Front |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 6 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1574 kg | 1635 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5100 mm | 4690 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1860 mm | 1760 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1420 mm | 1480 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2760 mm | 2680 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 68 L | 58 L |
