2015 Cadillac ATS MPG is between 16 MPG and 31 MPG depending on engine:
The 2015 Cadillac ATS MPG to weight ratio is shown in the graph:
We calculated that 2015 Cadillac ATS MPG is up to 41% worse than the world average consumption.
Vehicle | Consumption (city / highway) | Consumption to weight ratio | Difference from world average consumption | Driving range (full tank) | Consumption per passenger |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2.0 |
21
/
31 MPG
(11.2 / 7.6 L per 100 km) |
- | 22% worse |
311—497 miles
(500—800 km) |
2.4 L per 100 km / person |
V 3.6 V6 |
16
/
24 MPG
(14.7 / 9.8 L per 100 km) |
1.4 L per 100 km to 100 kg | 41% worse |
249—373 miles
(400—600 km) |
3.1 L per 100 km / person |
3.6 V6 |
18
/
28 MPG
(13.1 / 8.4 L per 100 km) |
1.4 L per 100 km to 100 kg | 31% worse |
311—435 miles
(500—700 km) |
2.7 L per 100 km / person |
Vehicle | 2.0 |
---|---|
Consumption (city / highway) |
21
/
31 MPG
(11.2 / 7.6 L per 100 km) |
Consumption to weight ratio | - |
Difference from world average consumption | 22% worse |
Driving range (full tank) | 311—497 miles (500—800 km) |
Consumption per passenger | 2.4 L per 100 km / person |
Vehicle | V 3.6 V6 |
Consumption (city / highway) |
16
/
24 MPG
(14.7 / 9.8 L per 100 km) |
Consumption to weight ratio | 1.4 L per 100 km to 100 kg |
Difference from world average consumption | 41% worse |
Driving range (full tank) | 249—373 miles (400—600 km) |
Consumption per passenger | 3.1 L per 100 km / person |
Vehicle | 3.6 V6 |
Consumption (city / highway) |
18
/
28 MPG
(13.1 / 8.4 L per 100 km) |
Consumption to weight ratio | 1.4 L per 100 km to 100 kg |
Difference from world average consumption | 31% worse |
Driving range (full tank) | 311—435 miles (500—700 km) |
Consumption per passenger | 2.7 L per 100 km / person |
2013 Cadillac ATS MPG is between 17 MPG and 37 MPG depending on engine:
The 2013 Cadillac ATS MPG to weight ratio is shown in the graph:
We calculated that 2013 Cadillac ATS MPG is up to 41% worse than the world average consumption.
Vehicle | Consumption (city / highway) | Consumption to weight ratio | Difference from world average consumption | Driving range (full tank) | Consumption per passenger |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2.0 |
20
/
37 MPG
(12 / 6.3 L per 100 km) |
1.8 L per 100 km to 100 kg | 13% worse |
311—621 miles
(500—1000 km) |
1.7 L per 100 km / person |
2.5 |
22
/
33 MPG
(10.7 / 7.1 L per 100 km) |
1.7 L per 100 km to 100 kg | 19% worse |
373—559 miles
(600—900 km) |
1.8 L per 100 km / person |
3.6 V6 |
19
/
28 MPG
(12.4 / 8.4 L per 100 km) |
1.5 L per 100 km to 100 kg | 31% worse |
311—435 miles
(500—700 km) |
2.1 L per 100 km / person |
V 3.6 V6 |
17
/
23 MPG
(13.8 / 10.2 L per 100 km) |
1.4 L per 100 km to 100 kg | 41% worse |
249—373 miles
(400—600 km) |
2.5 L per 100 km / person |
Vehicle | 2.0 |
---|---|
Consumption (city / highway) |
20
/
37 MPG
(12 / 6.3 L per 100 km) |
Consumption to weight ratio | 1.8 L per 100 km to 100 kg |
Difference from world average consumption | 13% worse |
Driving range (full tank) | 311—621 miles (500—1000 km) |
Consumption per passenger | 1.7 L per 100 km / person |
Vehicle | 2.5 |
Consumption (city / highway) |
22
/
33 MPG
(10.7 / 7.1 L per 100 km) |
Consumption to weight ratio | 1.7 L per 100 km to 100 kg |
Difference from world average consumption | 19% worse |
Driving range (full tank) | 373—559 miles (600—900 km) |
Consumption per passenger | 1.8 L per 100 km / person |
Vehicle | 3.6 V6 |
Consumption (city / highway) |
19
/
28 MPG
(12.4 / 8.4 L per 100 km) |
Consumption to weight ratio | 1.5 L per 100 km to 100 kg |
Difference from world average consumption | 31% worse |
Driving range (full tank) | 311—435 miles (500—700 km) |
Consumption per passenger | 2.1 L per 100 km / person |
Vehicle | V 3.6 V6 |
Consumption (city / highway) |
17
/
23 MPG
(13.8 / 10.2 L per 100 km) |
Consumption to weight ratio | 1.4 L per 100 km to 100 kg |
Difference from world average consumption | 41% worse |
Driving range (full tank) | 249—373 miles (400—600 km) |
Consumption per passenger | 2.5 L per 100 km / person |