mmarshall

By general interest, a Review of the 2010 Cadillac CTS Sportwagon.

http://www.cadillac.com/vehicles/201...on/overview.do

In a Nutshell: A superb-looking car (IMO), with marked personality and good road manners, but reliability may be a question mark.























I haven't gotten any specific requests for a 2010 Sportwagon review, but I was very impressed with the car when I saw the exterior of one the D.C. Auto Show last January (Cadillac had a red one out on the floor in easy view but wouldn't unlock it). I did get some CL-requests for CTS reviews a few years ago for the then-new 2Gen sedan model, and reviewed/test-drove two versions. But, I didn't think it was one of my better reviews (I wasn't completely satisfied with the way I wrote them up), and, of course, my reviews back then did not include pictures/images or as comprenensive write-ups as they do now. But I did notice a lot of positive comments about the new 2010 Wagon version (which, with its good looks, is not surprising), and some general CL interest in it. Since I'm still waiting for the Ford Fiesta hatchback, Hyundai Equus, and Honda CR-Z (all CL-requested reviews) to become available here in the D.C. area, I saw I had some time to kill today (Saturday), and decided to put it to good use. (I did do a preview/partial review on the Fiesta SEL sedan last week, but I'm waiting for the hatchback for the full-review).

The current CTS, of course, traces its lineage (or the basic marketing idea) back to the Catera of the late 1990's, which was done on a Opel-designed platform that GM shared with Saab, Saturn, and its Opel/Vauxhall Euro-divisions. Though the Catera was a marked improvement over the ill-fated and poorly-designed Cimarron of the early/mid 1980s, which many auto pundits (including me) thought a joke, it still wasn't, IMO, a particularly impressive car. The Catera I test-drove, I remember, had rather poor fit/finish for an entry-level-luxury car, and several creaks/small rattles to boot. The Catera also proved quite unreliable in service.....a problem that, to a lesser extent, has continued to plague the CTS to this very day.

The Catera, in 2001, was dropped and replaced by the 1Gen CTS, a car that had controversial styling (I myself liked its exterior styling, but many others didn't). But, IMO, it was also rather unimpressive for an entry-level luxury car. The interior was poorly-designed in several areas and had a lot of cheap, poorly-finished plastic pieces inside.....this was back, of course, before GM started taking more pride in its interiors 4-5 years ago. But, even by the Cadillac standards of the time, I thought the first CTS was rather unimpressive except for its sharp, handsome exterior styling. Cadillac later added a CTS-V high-performance model which allowed it to compete, at least on paper, with some BMW M-cars and Mercedes AMG models, but the 1Gen CTS-V drivetrain. particularly the rear differential, could not stand the stress of hard driving. Several auto-test magazines, with their long-term test models, reported early differential failures.

Well, much of that went out with the 2Gen CTS model, which bowed about 3-4 years ago. Reliability improved a little (still remaining below average, according to Consumer Reports). But, with many other features, it was clear that GM had learned from the errors of the 1Gen model. Outside, the chunk-block styling remained, the paint job/trim was markedly improved....and inside, the new interior showed enormous improvement. Bob Lutz, GM's chief, was rather embarassed by the interior on the 1Gen model, said he was personally going to make sure that it was not repeated.....and it showed. A few pieces of cheap plastic here and there remained, but the difference was like night and day. The 2Gen model, of course, later added CTS-V and Sportwagon models......the wagon, of course, being the subject of this review.

For 2010, the Sportwagon comes in five different trim levels, each one with a choice of RWD or AWD....for a total of ten major combinations. There are 3.0L V6 AWD/RWD, 3.0L Luxury RWD/AWD, 3.0 Performance RWD/AWD, 3.6L V6 Performance RWD/AWD, and 3.6L Performance/Premium RWD/AWD models. A high-performance CTS-V Sportwagon, with the supercharged, 6.2L 556 HP V8, is (supposedly) on the way, but not on sale yet. The 3.0L V6 has 270 HP at 7000 RPM and 223 Ft-lbs. of torque at 5700 RPM (obviously a high-winding engine). The Direct-Injected 3.6L V6 has 304 HP at 6400 RPM and 273 Ft-lbs. of torque at 5200 RPM (these are the same two V6s, BTW, that are available in the new 2010 Buick LaCrosse). Only one transmision is offered...a 6-speed Sport-Shift automatic (I think this is also the same unit as in the new LaCrosse). All 3.6L Sportwagon models get a sport suspension/tires and a locking (limited-slip) rear differential.

Sportwagons are current in fairly good supply locally here at D.C.-area Cadillac dealerships (the shop I was at today had several to choose from), but it is generally not one of Cadillac's better-selling vehicles, so you probably won't find a huge number of them in stock.

For the review, I chose a black, top-level, 3.6L Performance/Premium AWD model, figuring that most potential buyers in this class don't want stripped or base-level models. Winter weather, here in the D.C. area, can often be bad enough that AWD comes in handy (I, of course, drive a Subaru myself). Even so, this car was no Cheapie, listing for almost 55K. Base-level, FWD, 3.0L versions start just under 40K, but, of course, lack the power and hardware of the upper-level models. The extra power of the 3.6L also comes in handy, as the AWD system on this car does sap some engine torque.....more on that below.

When I chose the black top-level model for review and started to write down the price/options data from the window-sticker like I usually do, I noticed something strange....the paint color printed on the factory price-sticker (red) did not match that on the car itself (black). Neither, as far as I could tell, did the options list. So, to be sure, I checked the VIN on the sticker with that stamped on the car itself......no match. This was obviously a goof either at the factory or dealer level, and as I did my review/examination of the cargo area, I found the (apparantly) correct sticker stuffed down below the trunk floor, under a double-panel, just above the temporary-spare tire. So I once again checked the color/VIN, just to be sure.....this time, everything matched. I took both stickers inside and showed them to the salespeople, and their faces turned red. They thanked me and said that some people have been known to sue dealerships over matters like that....I thought they were kidding, even in litigation-happy America, but they were serious. I hope I didn't get someone in the PDI (Pre-Delivery Inspection) department fired over that.

So, then, it was back to finish the review and do the test-drive. Details coming up.



Model Reviewed: 2010 Cadillac CTS Sportwagon 3.6L AWD Performance/Premium

Base Price: $53,870


Options:

Temporary-Spare tire (Replaces the standard compressed-air can) (Come on, Caddy....give us a break): $250


Destination/Freight: $825 (about average for this class)

List Price as reviewed: $54,695


Drivetrain: AWD, Longitudional-mounted 3.6L DI (Direct-Injected) V6, 304 HP @ 6400 RPM, Torque 273 Ft-lbs. @ 5200 RPM, 6-speed Sportshift automatic, Locking (Limited-slip) rear differential.

EPA Mileage Rating: (AWD) 18 City, 26 Highway



Exterior Color: Black Raven

Interior: Cashmere/Cocoa Leather




PLUSSES:


Dynamite (IMO) exterior styling.

AWD option aids winter traction.

Underhood cross-brace for added structural rigidity.

Quick, sporty steering response.

Smooth, quiet engine/transmission at low RPMs.

Slick-operating shifter.

Good wind noise isolation.

Firm, responsive brake pedal.

Classy, well-done wood steering wheel.

Vastly better interior trim/hardware than previous version.

Excellent paint job.

Superbly-finished cargo area.

Nice seat leather.

Borderline killer Bose stereo.

Simple, clear primary gauges.

Well-done ignition switch.

Chrome/Metal cargo tie-down hooks instead of plastic.

Excellent GM/Cadillac 5/100 Drivetain and 4/50 Bumper-to-Bumper warranties.

Standard On-Star security system.





MINUSES:


Questionable long-term reliability.

Extra-charge for temporary-spare tire (This is outrageous on a 50K+ car)

AWD saps engine torque.

Slight road noise from sport-oriented, 50-series tires.

Exhaust/engine noise climbs markedly with RPMs.

Tight headroom in front for tall persons (with sunroof).

Extra-tight headroom in rear for tall persons (with sunroof).

Skimpy rear legroom with front-seats adjusted back.

Somewhat restricted rear vision from big D-Pillars (but I've seen lots worse)

Flimsy-feeling single hood strut.

Poor underhood layout for DIY'ers.

Some loose, poorly-fitted underhood parts on my test car.

Fairly low ground clearance with lower-body-side flares.

Too-small, trapezoid-shaped side mirrors.

Somewhat flimsy-feeling side-mirror housings.

Somewhat busy-looking, confusing center-dash buttons.

Exterior paint colors too restricted and generally too dull.





EXTERIOR:

The exterior styling is easily this car's best feature, IMO, though I know that styling is objective and that some people find it controversial. Still, in my book, this is a superb-looking car. For one thing, it has a distinct personality, with the chunk-block front/rear ends typical of most newer Cadillacs and none of the usual mee-too, stamped cookie-cutter, aero/jellybean look that so many other vehicles have today. Cadillacs, and the CTS and SRX in particular, distinctly stand out from the crowd when it comes to their exterior looks....and stand out in a nice way.

And that nice-looking skin is nicely-finished, too....as I mentioned earlier, an enormous change from the old Catera and 1Gen CTS. The black paint job and chrome trim on my test-car was close to Lexus levels, with a smooth, almost mirror-like gloss and evenness of finish (black, of course, for several reasons, is a particularly hard color to do well). I have noticed, not just on Cadillacs, but on many newer GM products, that many paint jobs, along with the interiors, have improved quite a bit in just the last several years.....both, in GM products, used to be quite poor, but are no longer the case. I wasn't impressed, though, with the body-side mirrors...their trapezoid shape and small size hindered side-views, but the CTS, in some versions, comes with electronic viewing-aids that help make up for part of that. Nor was I impressed with the choice of only 6 exterior paint colors, especially in a car of this price class....and 5 out the 6, IMO, were fit for the morgue, with only the red standing out. Nor, considering the AWD, was I impressed with the rather low ground clearance that the suspension, tires, and lower body-side flares gave, though it no doubt improved the handling.....and I do understand that this is a sport-oriented vehicle, not a Jeep. Of course, if one needs a higher-stance for deeper snow, there is always its brother SRX at the other end of the showroom.




UNDERHOOD:

Not a very good underhood layout, IMO, especially for DIY'ers....and there were some poorly-fitted pieces as well. When I reached under the hood-lip to undo the safety-latch, I felt a block-rubber-pad pop right out of its mounting-hole...I stuffed it back in, but couldn't tell which way was correct. The single gas hood-strut, mounted on the left, had a somewhat loose, wobbly feel....good thing the very lightweight aluminum hood didn't put much weight on it. Once the hood was up, it had a nice insulation pad underneath. (some engine noise still got through, as I'll explain later). There was a nice, brushed-metal underhood cross-brace between the two tower struts....a common practice with many sports-oriented vehicles to add chassis rigidity and stiffen up torsional-twisting. The 3.6L DI V6, mounted longitudinlally, was not stuffed in too tightly, and allowed a little room on the front and sides of the engine block to reach things, but, like most upmarket cars today, had a big plastic cover and covers for all the components around it. The plastic engine cover was also poorly-fitted (That may have contributed to some of the higher-RPM engine noise I heard). It was secured on the right side, but was loose on the left.....and you couldn't easily get it off because the the cross-brace more-or-less held it in place. On the good side, dipsticks, reservoirs, and filler-caps were fairly-easily accessable. The engine is set into the bay rather far back, with part of it hidden back under the firewall...that, of course, helps with the vehicle's weight distribution, getting it as close to 50/50 as possible for well-balanced handling, but, of course, can interfere with some rear-engine accessability.




INTERIOR:

Though not perfect, a vast improvement over previous CTS models...and some things seem to have been honed even within the current-production, 2Gen model. The first thing you notice is the classy, well-shaped steering wheel with the nice highly-polished wood upper-rim........thick, real wood, not plastic wood-tone. The steering-column has power-motors for both tilt-telescope features. The stereo is a borderline-killer Bose 10-speaker unit, with both easy-to-use ***** and not-so-easy to use touch-screen features, that didn't respond well, on the pop-up NAV screen. But the stereo sound, courtesy of the Bose speakers, was superb. All of the interior wood, aluminum/brushed-metal, and chrome looked and felt of high quality. Most of the interior hardware, with a couple of exceptions, also felt fairly durable and much better-done than the first CTS. The lower-dash panels also didn't have the tendency to hit the knees of tall drivers like those in the 1Gen model. The seat leather, though not the richest I've seen or Jaguar/Lexus grade, was nice and befitting of the price. The cushions provided reasonable comfort and support, though clearly not sharply-bolstered sports-car seats. The headliner and sun visors were done in a fairly nice material, and the door-panel trim was comfortable to rest your elbow on. The primary gauges were clear and easily-read, but some of the center-stack buttons were too busy-looking, too similiar to one another, and not easily workable at a glance. The pop-up NAV screen was generally clear and easy-to-read, but some touch-features were not very sensitive. My only real beef inside was the rather tight accomodations........this is clearly not a car for NBA guys (move up to the Escalade for that). The somewhat low roofline that adds to the car's looks also cuts deeply into front-seat headroom, especially with the sunroof. Rear headroom, for tall people, is even tighter, and, of course, the rear seat-height is not adjustable like it is up front....up front I could barely fit, with my ubiquitous baseball cap, under the roof with the seat-cushion all the way down. Legroom in front was fine, but tight in the rear for tall people when the front seats were pushed back.





CARGO AREA/TRUNK:

Superby-done, with a very high level of fit/finish, although the rather low roofline impacted on some cargo space, and the thick, blocky D-pillars, with small windows built into them, didn't do much for rear vision. A nice, plush, soft-feeling carpet covered not only the floor but both walls as well. Thick chrome/metal cargo-retaining tie-down loops, rather than the usual plastic, lined both floor rail-strips. The rear seats, of course, fold down for added cargo space. Under the thick-carpeted upper trunk-floor lies another removable panel with gray carpeting (that's where I found the car's correct factory-sticker). Under that secondary panel lies the cargo area's worst feature.....a $250 Temporary spare tire, and my only real beef with the cargo area. It's bad enough that a car of this price doesn't have a real spare and makes do with a temporary one, but, IMO, charging 250 more of your hard-earned dollars for it instead of the standard compressed-air, Fix-a-Flat bottle is adding insult to injury. Mr. Lutz.....where are you when we need you?



ON THE ROAD:

Start up the Direct-Injected 3.6L V6 with a proximity key and a built-in ignition twist-**** on the column....I like that design even more than the START/STOP button that a lot of upmarket vehicles have. The V6 comes to life with the smooth, quiet idle expected of a Cadillac. Engine/transmission smoothness/refinement is fine at lower RPMs, and power is fine for everyday stop-go driving, but both exhaust and engine noise tends to build noticeably as RPMs increase (part of that, of course, may have been the loosely-mounted plastic engine cover...hard to tell). The power level is fine for most driving, but the extra weight/drag of the AWD hardware impacts noticeably on acceleration. Even so, this car is not slow by any means, and will give you a noticeable shove in the back if you push it. My test car had some miles on it, was fully-broken-in, and so I was able to give it more RPMs than I usually do on a test-drive with brand-new cars. And both the 3.0L and 3.6L have max-HP/torque figures at fairly high RPMs, so you have to wind them out for max power. Still, if you are shopping for an AWD CTS model, get the 3.6L......although I did not sample an AWD 3.0L, that engines's lower torque figure would probably not adapt to AWD quite as well, and the system would sap even more torque. Unfortunately, the rival Buick LaCrosse does not offer its AWD with the 3.6 like the CTS does; only with the 3.0L

The transmission was quite refined, as most of the better GM units are, flexible with the 6 gears, and slick-shifting in both full-auto and auto-manual modes. There were no shift-paddles on my test car (at least I don't remember any), but the shifter **** was slick-moving, comfortable to hold, and, on my car's trim-package, had a nice real wood ****. It also had a nice fore/aft shift pattern, with no zig-zags (I'd like to see a Federal Motor-Vehicle law outlawing those confusing, frustrating zig-zag patterns).

The chassis was surprisingly well-done, almost BMW-like in its ability to combine and balance ride/handling, although not quite BMW-like in its tactile steering feel. The car had a generally heavy, solid feel overall, but with quick, sporty steering response and very little body roll. Steering effort, as just noted, was not quite BMW in its tactile feel, but the quick, sports-car-like response had very little understeer. The AWD grip, of course, helped somewhat, even on dry pavement. The cross-brace under the hood also helped noticeably. Wind noise was well-controlled, as befits a luxury-sports vehicle, but the 50-series sports-oriented tires did transmit a little road noise, even on smooth pavement. Ride comfort, like on Sport-Package BMWs, was surprisingly good considering the crisp handling level....and was accomplished without trick electronic or adjustable suspension parts. Still, you know you are not in an AARP-grade Cadillac DTS....you do feel bumps. Brakes were also a good point.....a firm, generally sponge-free pedal with good response, and the pedal itself was designed/located so that it generally did not impact on my big size-15 shoes catching on it while going from gas-pedal to brake. The brakes had more or less the feel of many German upmarket sedans......not surprising (along with the BMW-feel chassis) considering that much of the CTS development was done in Germany.




THE VERDICT:

This is generally a well-done sport wagon (hence its name) with dynamite looks that stand out from the everyday crowd. Guys, if you want a wagon that will impress your Friday night date, this is it. Its interior, especially in the high-line trim I reviewed, is rich-looking, rich-feeling, and light-years ahead of the old CTS (IMO, this is the interior the original car should have gotten but didn't). Unlike most vehicles, it offers an AWD option with both engines and in all trim levels.....although I'm not sure that the 3.0 AWD would be the best choice. The chassis/steering is almost BMW-grade, lacking only a little of the famous BMW-tactile feel. The cargo area is superbly-finished. And it is well-backed with GM's long Cadillac warranty.

But there are several flies in the ointment. The interior headroom/legroom is not good for tall people, so people of greater-than-average height may want to consider special-ordering one without a sunroof (the salespeople said it could be done). Reliability, though not the worst on the market, is not likely to be good in the long run....this is one CTS problem that does not seem to have been licked yet. The underhood design and quality, IMO, both need work. And the standard Fix-a-Flat bottle and $250 temporary-tire charge, for a car of this class, is outrageous, bordering on the absurd.

There you have it....a superb-looking car that generally drives well, but is a somewhat risky reliability choice. it's not cheap, ranging from 40K to the nearly 55K for my test-model. But I know that some of you (especially those with money) will want to wait for the upcoming 556-HP CTS-V Sportwagon. That model will combine the Sportwagen's superb looks with a monster powertrain.


And, as always, of course............Happy Car Shopping.

MM

TripleL

mmarshall - excellent review I really enjoyed the read, thank you.

I think Caddy has done a very good job with this latest generation of the CTS. In fact, my brother was impressed enough with the sedan and wagon that he has a CTS coupe on order sight/unseen. (<not sure how to properly spell that )


I thought the overall positive observations you had with the inside and outside the car and on the road spoke well to Caddy listening to what people want. I was a little disappointed to hear some of your underhood observations so I guess Caddy has some more work to do there.

mmarshall

Thanks.

Sure. Anytime.

You've spelled it well enough.

Good luck to your brother's new coupe. I like its looks too, but not quite as much as the Sportwagon's. Let us know what you think of it when he gets it.


It's hard to sit in an old 1Gen CTS, then get into a 2Gen model, and NOT have a lot of positive comments to say. The difference is like night and day, although tall people, in the new model, will find the sunroof-housing restrictive of headroom and the rear seat a little lacking in foot/leg room. Most of the underhood problems are just cheapness and maybe some sloppy assembly. Not all sample models are likely to have the exact same problems, especially with the defective block-rubber-pad on my car.

CDNROCKIES

Well done as usual Mike.

Saw one one on the highway a couple of weeks ago. This car doesn't get nearly the credit it deserves. I tried very hard to convince the wife to get the V rather than a second SUV...but couldn't convince her.

I found the interior to be solid, but there is a bit more chrome than I prefer. Overall a very solid vehicle at a reasonable price.

LexFather

Mike great review and glad you drove it. Seems we agree on many points. I also am head over heels with the styling, it is magnificent. Interior is also solid. I'm with you on interior room, it is skimpy compared to a SUV.

Price is also tough, 54k can buy a lot of other vehicles and SUVs including their own SRX.

Still its a great vehicle for the non-conformist that doesn't want to be in a SUV and prefers the true sporty dynamics of a car.

mmarshall

Thanks.

You're talking about the sedan V, correct? the SportWagon V is rumored to be on the way, but is not officially for sale yet. Any V model, of course, is going to be a lot of $$$$$.......even more than the top-level 3.6 Performance/Premium model for this review. They start at 62K.

Maybe so, but compared to the cheapness/starkness ofthe previous interior, the chrome, brushed metal, and wood of the new one is richly appreciated.



Yes, base 3.0, RWD models can be had around 40K. Not so for the upmarket ones. And the base models, of course, have the same dynamite looks as the high-zoot ones.

mmarshall

Thanks.

More so, I guess, than with the Acura RL.



Yes, like most of today's Cadillacs, it's a refreshing change from the world of aero/jelly-bean styling, but the Sportwagon, in particular, is good-looking.

54K buys the top-level version, but there are plenty of less-expensive models for those with thiner wallets. Like I noted above, base 3.0 FWD models start at 38-40K.

Yes....but, on that note, it gets a lot of competition from mid-size BMW wagons and the Audi Avants.

Fizzboy7

Great review. It's nice when someone takes the time and is thorough.

My personal take on this Catera I mean CTS is it's not for everyone. But I picture a lot of **** directors in Chatsworth, CA chosing this car to replace their aging Dodge Magnums. Same type of excessive, obnoxious, and extroverted character for mid-aged Americans who skipped over the hip-hop era.

Where I came up with that one I have no idea. But late-night CL ramblings are a great way to pass a quiet evening.

LexTriton

iTrader: (1)

You mention the base 3.0 being front wheel drive (FWD)... It was my understanding that the CTS only came in RWD and AWD? Did I miss the boat some where?

caddyowner

Good job, Mike. Your review mirrors my impressions of the car. It was just too tight inside for me. I also won't get another car on that platform due to my past experience.

In 2002, I was excited about the styling and performance of the upcoming CTS. I test drove an 03 and found that the carry-over Catera engine was too weak. When the 04 came out with the 3.6 engine, I was sold. My 04 was a good car with no major problems. It had a few too many service visits, but I was pleased enough to lease an 06 SRX as I needed a bit more room.

I loved everything about the SRX, except it had a long-running affair with my Cadillac service department. Nothing too major, but lots of little annoyances. I had so many DTS loaners that I came to like them and considered buying one instead of my LS430. I also briefly considered the STS, but suspected I'd still be driving a DTS loaner frequently.

I used to rile up Cadillac dealers and CTS owners by saying CTS stands for Catera Touring Sedan. (Which of course it originally did, despite the protestations of Cadillac marketing.) Folks would get all defensive about how it was a completely different car, built in a new plant in Lansing, etc. Then I'd show them a picture of the back of my stock CTS grille that I replaced with an E&G unit. The stock grille had "Catera" molded in the plastic.

mmarshall

Yes, sorry, that was a typo (I sometimes make them). Like the last CTS, this is definitely a RWD platform, with AWD as an option.

(I'll go back and correct that).

And no, you didn't miss the boat.....the handling/road manners on this car is anything BUT a boat.

mmarshall

Thanks.

You must be tall, like me.

Not all CTS and SRX models have been troublesome, but their general reliability ratings have not been good, especially with Consumer Reports. That's why I said they are somewhat of a gamble.

More or less typical. I found several loose or poorly-attached parts on the CTS I reviewed. Other owners also report similiar experiences.


If you are not an aggressive driver or don't care about sharp handling, the DTS has a very comfortable ride. Cars like that are getting few and far between nowadays....the industry is definitely focused on handling.

Dealerships don't always have the most competent people. The one I was at yesterday couldn't even put the correct price sticker on.

Of course, to be fair, anyone can make a mistake. In your case, when they have to deal with thousands of auto parts each day......including specific grilles and their markings/mouldings. And, in my case, someone at the dealership taping on the wrong factory sticker is rare. I don't often see that......but I do often see second, add-on price stickers on vehicles that, for various reasons, don't merit one.

mmarshall

Thanks. I definitely take time.....I don't just sit down and do these in 10 minutes. But, as noted above, they aren't perfect......I still sometimes make an occasional error or typo.

This is a good-looking car, but just how much it may (?) appeal to the sleeze industry, I can't comment on.......I have no idea.

ANY time of day or night, IMO, is a good time to be on CL and CAR CHAT.

rdgdawg

EXCELLENT as always Mike!!!

You got that right ... I want to check out that CTS-V coupe, but again they can't even get the sedan around here so...........

ecr527

Great write up!!! I really like the look of the CTS wagon over the sedan. A spare tire is an option though? Are they serious??? What's next? Will we need to make a choice betweeen the standard wheel chocks, or the available parking brake?