2014 Cadillac CTS, CTS V-Sport, reviews, and comparisons
11-18-13, 02:36 PM
#76
Guest
Posts: n/a
The reason why I say that the CTS is nicer than a GS is because of the style and look of both the interior and exterior. The materials to me are a wash as they are all good in the segment.
Where the CTS excels is that it is different than all the others and a distinct style that is all its own. Lexus just copied the Germans in everything they did and I am so bored of it. My CT is almost up for lease buyout and I am probably not going the Lexus route again as I hate the remote touch and I am kinda bored of Lexus.
The moment I saw the CTS I knew it was stunning and when I sat in it I just felt that it was something different and not a copy cat.
Where the CTS excels is that it is different than all the others and a distinct style that is all its own. Lexus just copied the Germans in everything they did and I am so bored of it. My CT is almost up for lease buyout and I am probably not going the Lexus route again as I hate the remote touch and I am kinda bored of Lexus.
The moment I saw the CTS I knew it was stunning and when I sat in it I just felt that it was something different and not a copy cat.
How does Lexus "just copy the Germans in everything" and Cadillac has not? Are we on the same planet?
Awesome, get rid of the CT! Very happy to hear.
:thumb up:Gotdamnit I knew I should have not come back in this thread.
11-18-13, 02:48 PM
#77
Lexus Fanatic
What do you mean materials are a wash b/c they are in the same segment? So all cars in the same segment have equal interiors? The GS interior is one of the best at ANY price point.
How does Lexus "just copy the Germans in everything" and Cadillac has not? Are we on the same planet?
Awesome, get rid of the CT! Very happy to hear.:thumb up:
Gotdamnit I knew I should have not come back in this thread.
How does Lexus "just copy the Germans in everything" and Cadillac has not? Are we on the same planet?
Awesome, get rid of the CT! Very happy to hear.
:thumb up:Gotdamnit I knew I should have not come back in this thread.
Come on? You don't see how Lexus copied the Germans?
11-18-13, 02:56 PM
#78
Guest
Posts: n/a
Where the CTS excels is that it is different than all the others and a distinct style that is all its own. Lexus just copied the Germans in everything they did and I am so bored of it.
I might have misinterpreted your post to think you meant overall and not just the interior.
Point taken.
11-18-13, 03:09 PM
#79
Lexus Fanatic
Don't change your stance. You said.
If you mean interior design, most of us all agree they went with a Germanic design with their touches of Japanese detailing. Overall, everyone both Lexus and Caddy copied with RWD sedans going after the 5 series.
I might have misinterpreted your post to think you meant overall and not just the interior.
Point taken.
If you mean interior design, most of us all agree they went with a Germanic design with their touches of Japanese detailing. Overall, everyone both Lexus and Caddy copied with RWD sedans going after the 5 series.
I might have misinterpreted your post to think you meant overall and not just the interior.
Point taken.
11-18-13, 03:14 PM
#80
Lexus Fanatic
11-18-13, 03:39 PM
#81
Guest
Posts: n/a
What a horrible choice!BTW, unlike most talking **** on the internet, I drove it to a huge car event this weekend. While it was one of the least modified cars there, I left the windows down and the Mark Levinson sound system playing full blast and everyone I came with was utterly amazed by the attention it got. People here would have you believe its the worst car in the world and sells like ice cream in the arctic.
Again kudos to Caddy for an amazing offering and elevating the CTS-V. I will not drag the car down as I have not experienced it yet and I have a feeling it is quite a solid entry in this segment.
11-18-13, 04:12 PM
#83
11-18-13, 04:16 PM
#84
Lexus Fanatic
My issue is the details. The CTS is just not as well "finished" as other cars in this class. When you look at the "materials" (leather, carpeting, dash materials, wood trims, metal trims) they're very good, but its the details where it lacks IMHO. The trim around the windows, the area at the top of the windshield where the sensors are for the rain sense wipers, lane assist, etc, the turn signal stalks, the window controls, the headliner and overhead console, the other switchgear, the rear pulldown armrest, the finishes around the rear seats/front setbacks in general.
When you look at something like the GS the details are much more refined. Same is true in the A6, 5 Series, E Class. Oddly enough I would say the A6 probably has the lowest level material quality in the segment, but the high level of attention to detail raises that interior above something like a 5 Series IMHO.
Oddly enough I did not feel that way about the XTS, I will have to sit in one again.
Maybe we just have different tastes. I know you like the GX inside, and I thought it was pretty poor from a quality standpoint. I remember you said something about the GS feeling "hollow", which I still don't understand. How do you feel about the interior of your CT?
When you look at something like the GS the details are much more refined. Same is true in the A6, 5 Series, E Class. Oddly enough I would say the A6 probably has the lowest level material quality in the segment, but the high level of attention to detail raises that interior above something like a 5 Series IMHO.
Oddly enough I did not feel that way about the XTS, I will have to sit in one again.
Maybe we just have different tastes. I know you like the GX inside, and I thought it was pretty poor from a quality standpoint. I remember you said something about the GS feeling "hollow", which I still don't understand. How do you feel about the interior of your CT?
11-18-13, 05:22 PM
#85
My issue is the details. The CTS is just not as well "finished" as other cars in this class. When you look at the "materials" (leather, carpeting, dash materials, wood trims, metal trims) they're very good, but its the details where it lacks IMHO. The trim around the windows, the area at the top of the windshield where the sensors are for the rain sense wipers, lane assist, etc, the turn signal stalks, the window controls, the headliner and overhead console, the other switchgear, the rear pulldown armrest, the finishes around the rear seats/front setbacks in general.
When you look at something like the GS the details are much more refined. Same is true in the A6, 5 Series, E Class. Oddly enough I would say the A6 probably has the lowest level material quality in the segment, but the high level of attention to detail raises that interior above something like a 5 Series IMHO.
Oddly enough I did not feel that way about the XTS, I will have to sit in one again.
Maybe we just have different tastes. I know you like the GX inside, and I thought it was pretty poor from a quality standpoint. I remember you said something about the GS feeling "hollow", which I still don't understand. How do you feel about the interior of your CT?
When you look at something like the GS the details are much more refined. Same is true in the A6, 5 Series, E Class. Oddly enough I would say the A6 probably has the lowest level material quality in the segment, but the high level of attention to detail raises that interior above something like a 5 Series IMHO.
Oddly enough I did not feel that way about the XTS, I will have to sit in one again.
Maybe we just have different tastes. I know you like the GX inside, and I thought it was pretty poor from a quality standpoint. I remember you said something about the GS feeling "hollow", which I still don't understand. How do you feel about the interior of your CT?
11-18-13, 05:42 PM
#86
Lexus Fanatic
11-18-13, 06:24 PM
#87
At ANY price point? I thought you have been in many highend cars?
I think the Bentley Mulsanne's interior is the best at ANY price point, it makes the 4GS interior looks like a Yaris.
Last edited by BNR34; 11-18-13 at 06:45 PM.
11-18-13, 06:25 PM
#88
Lexus Fanatic
My issue is the details. The CTS is just not as well "finished" as other cars in this class. When you look at the "materials" (leather, carpeting, dash materials, wood trims, metal trims) they're very good, but its the details where it lacks IMHO. The trim around the windows, the area at the top of the windshield where the sensors are for the rain sense wipers, lane assist, etc, the turn signal stalks, the window controls, the headliner and overhead console, the other switchgear, the rear pulldown armrest, the finishes around the rear seats/front setbacks in general.
When you look at something like the GS the details are much more refined. Same is true in the A6, 5 Series, E Class. Oddly enough I would say the A6 probably has the lowest level material quality in the segment, but the high level of attention to detail raises that interior above something like a 5 Series IMHO.
Oddly enough I did not feel that way about the XTS, I will have to sit in one again.
Maybe we just have different tastes. I know you like the GX inside, and I thought it was pretty poor from a quality standpoint. I remember you said something about the GS feeling "hollow", which I still don't understand. How do you feel about the interior of your CT?
When you look at something like the GS the details are much more refined. Same is true in the A6, 5 Series, E Class. Oddly enough I would say the A6 probably has the lowest level material quality in the segment, but the high level of attention to detail raises that interior above something like a 5 Series IMHO.
Oddly enough I did not feel that way about the XTS, I will have to sit in one again.
Maybe we just have different tastes. I know you like the GX inside, and I thought it was pretty poor from a quality standpoint. I remember you said something about the GS feeling "hollow", which I still don't understand. How do you feel about the interior of your CT?
Don't get me wrong, the E, 5 series and GS are all very good cars and all have outstanding interiors , I just connected with the CTS the moment I saw it and I feel it is the best car in the segment.
11-18-13, 09:28 PM
#89
Forum Administrator
iTrader: (2)
Guys removed some inappropriate and rude personal comments. If you can't keep it on the topic of the vehicles I suggest you not post.
11-18-13, 10:51 PM
#90
Lexus Fanatic
iTrader: (20)
another very positive and solid review of the CTS V-Sport, this time in Car and Driver
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...-6-test-review
The lone domestic premium brand with a pulse is growing ever stronger and more confident as it slowly rises from its 30-year snooze. The second-generation Cadillac CTS-V and the new ATS were the first payments on debts from promises long made and *routinely broken. Now we’ve driven the reborn CTS and believe the General is indeed serious about returning Cadillac to the pointy end of the luxury market.
How do we know? Well, the 420-hp twin-turbo CTS Vsport we drove on GM’s own handling track and that streaked to 60 mph in 4.4 seconds simply felt fantastic, with a muscular engine integrated into a neutral chassis that’s been pulled as tight as piano wire. And, driving impressions and test figures aside, the CTS makes strides in cracking one of GM’s hardest nuts, the company’s persistent weight problem.
The CTS’s chief engineer, Dave Leone, tells us that the entire project was developed not with pounds or kilograms as the unit of measurement, but grams. A gram equals 0.0022 pound. Anyone presenting an idea to cut weight had to speak in grams, he says. “That’s how granular we had to be to beat the boys in Bavaria.” The CTS Vsport we tested sans the optional sunroof weighed 1,798,947 grams with a slight rear bias. That’s not exactly a gossamer goose, but it is substantially lighter than this particular model’s stated bogey, the BMW 550i. We tested that one in 2010, and it weighed 2,003,517 grams, or 4417 pounds, or 451 pounds more than our CTS Vsport test car. That’s roughly the gap between New York and Cleveland in an industry currently squeezing its designs for every possible pennyweight.
Spend a few minutes with Leone and you sense that he knows where each gram was filched from the CTS. The first production GM vehicle with aluminum doors also has an aluminum front subframe, bumper beams, shock towers, hood, and front-suspension arms. Feather-light magnesium engine mounts that have the heft of *cardboard origami in your hands save a whopping 680 grams (1.5 pounds) over the previous aluminum ones.
Ditching steel for aluminum, or magnesium, is an obvious but expensive solution. Other CTS nuances are less obvious. The B-pillar, previously assembled from eight separate steel stampings, now begins with a single “tailor-rolled” steel blank, meaning that the steel coil is manufactured with varying gauges so it’s thick where it needs to be and thin where it doesn’t. That saved 1814 grams. Stamping flanges are trimmed in a saw-toothed pattern to remove an unneeded 3000 grams or so of material between the spot-welds.
When you work in grams, ordering a milkshake without a straw would produce a significant savings. But clearly this isn’t the old GM, the company that wouldn’t trade you a rusty nail for a gram or a dram if it didn’t absolutely have to. Our test numbers further affirm that things have changed behind the wreath-and-crest. The panic-stop distance of 149 feet and the 0.97-g skidpad trace are both on par with several Porsches we can name, and they speak to the way in which a well-tuned chassis with suppressed pitch and roll exploits its very expensive Pirelli P Zero run-flat tires. They are sized for modest (and light) 18-inch wheels, the biggest CTS wheel available from the factory.
On GM’s suicidal handling loop, a woolly ride stitched together from replicas of some of racing’s worst widow-makers, the CTS Vsport glissades comfortably with slashing turn-in, gummy grip, and the scales narrowly balanced between understeer and rear-end looseness. Turn off the stability control and the sedan will go sideways with a flick once you’ve waded into the deep boost, but in such an easy and predictable way as to be thrilling fun. If you’re driving more judiciously for lap times, you can definitely feel the electronically controlled limited-slip differential, a Corvette hand-me-down that is standard on the Vsport, forcing the rear rubber to dig tenaciously.
The electrically boosted steering isolates, protecting the driver from all but the worst bumps. But it is tuned to supply a natural swell of effort in the corners, while the optional magnetorheological shocks make magic, keeping the body level and bounce-free. However you analyze the ingredients, the net effect is a Cadillac that finally closes the gap on its German counterparts.
The Vsport’s oversquare 3.6-liter runs medium boost, 15 psi, from two Mitsubishi (MHI) turbochargers. The impellers are closely coupled via short conduits to the central airbox atop the engine, which contains two air-to-liquid intercoolers and a single large throttle body. At 6500 rpm, the redline hangs low (it’s 7200 in the non-turbo 3.6), but you don’t need it any higher, what with the torque peak of 430 pound-feet arriving at 3500 rpm.
The Aisin eight-speed transmission offers four shifting modes, including tour, sport, track, and snow/ice. Tour works fine as a relaxed, eco-minded mode, but sport is a little too sporty, locking the transmission in lower gears for far too long as the engine, which is heard partly through the car’s audio system as a recording, wails at high revs. The sportiest modes should be called “track” and “track , seriously.”
An interior of simple forms and deluxe materials echoes European themes. The new CTS is about four inches longer, and rear passengers feel it in their legs. Push the start button and two giant ball bearings fly at you in the virtual gauge cluster, a thin-film-transistor screen with four driver-selectable gauge layouts. In the best layout, the ball bearings resolve into analog gauges with tightly spaced hash marks. The high-res center screen, part of Cadillac’s often-maddening CUE system, has a fast processor to quickly read out the data and navigation/entertainment selections.
Technology and capability don’t come free, and CTS prices are moving up. The menu is complicated by three engines, the choice of rear-drive or four-wheel drive, and three trim levels (Luxury, Perform*ance, and Premium). Basically, the entry-level 3.0-liter CTS has been replaced by a 2.0-liter turbo. The 3.6-liter V-6 starts at $46,025, an increase of $1790 from last year. And the Vsport launches at $59,995. Right now the most expensive CTS is the Vsport Premium, which has almost every CTS option as standard for $69,995, a sum nearly $4600 higher than the old CTS-V. Even the Vsport Premium will eventually be just an intermediate step up to the monster V, the new version of which hasn’t been revealed yet. That car should blow Cadillac’s price ceiling to even smaller shards.
Well, this is what the Germans charge for comparable performance. Now that Cadillac is finally serious about competing at the top level, it should be able to charge serious prices. Excellent job, Cadillac. Welcome back to the fight. Why don’t you take some time off—say, the next three and a half minutes—and then get back to work?
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...-6-test-review
The lone domestic premium brand with a pulse is growing ever stronger and more confident as it slowly rises from its 30-year snooze. The second-generation Cadillac CTS-V and the new ATS were the first payments on debts from promises long made and *routinely broken. Now we’ve driven the reborn CTS and believe the General is indeed serious about returning Cadillac to the pointy end of the luxury market.
How do we know? Well, the 420-hp twin-turbo CTS Vsport we drove on GM’s own handling track and that streaked to 60 mph in 4.4 seconds simply felt fantastic, with a muscular engine integrated into a neutral chassis that’s been pulled as tight as piano wire. And, driving impressions and test figures aside, the CTS makes strides in cracking one of GM’s hardest nuts, the company’s persistent weight problem.
The CTS’s chief engineer, Dave Leone, tells us that the entire project was developed not with pounds or kilograms as the unit of measurement, but grams. A gram equals 0.0022 pound. Anyone presenting an idea to cut weight had to speak in grams, he says. “That’s how granular we had to be to beat the boys in Bavaria.” The CTS Vsport we tested sans the optional sunroof weighed 1,798,947 grams with a slight rear bias. That’s not exactly a gossamer goose, but it is substantially lighter than this particular model’s stated bogey, the BMW 550i. We tested that one in 2010, and it weighed 2,003,517 grams, or 4417 pounds, or 451 pounds more than our CTS Vsport test car. That’s roughly the gap between New York and Cleveland in an industry currently squeezing its designs for every possible pennyweight.
Spend a few minutes with Leone and you sense that he knows where each gram was filched from the CTS. The first production GM vehicle with aluminum doors also has an aluminum front subframe, bumper beams, shock towers, hood, and front-suspension arms. Feather-light magnesium engine mounts that have the heft of *cardboard origami in your hands save a whopping 680 grams (1.5 pounds) over the previous aluminum ones.
Ditching steel for aluminum, or magnesium, is an obvious but expensive solution. Other CTS nuances are less obvious. The B-pillar, previously assembled from eight separate steel stampings, now begins with a single “tailor-rolled” steel blank, meaning that the steel coil is manufactured with varying gauges so it’s thick where it needs to be and thin where it doesn’t. That saved 1814 grams. Stamping flanges are trimmed in a saw-toothed pattern to remove an unneeded 3000 grams or so of material between the spot-welds.
When you work in grams, ordering a milkshake without a straw would produce a significant savings. But clearly this isn’t the old GM, the company that wouldn’t trade you a rusty nail for a gram or a dram if it didn’t absolutely have to. Our test numbers further affirm that things have changed behind the wreath-and-crest. The panic-stop distance of 149 feet and the 0.97-g skidpad trace are both on par with several Porsches we can name, and they speak to the way in which a well-tuned chassis with suppressed pitch and roll exploits its very expensive Pirelli P Zero run-flat tires. They are sized for modest (and light) 18-inch wheels, the biggest CTS wheel available from the factory.
On GM’s suicidal handling loop, a woolly ride stitched together from replicas of some of racing’s worst widow-makers, the CTS Vsport glissades comfortably with slashing turn-in, gummy grip, and the scales narrowly balanced between understeer and rear-end looseness. Turn off the stability control and the sedan will go sideways with a flick once you’ve waded into the deep boost, but in such an easy and predictable way as to be thrilling fun. If you’re driving more judiciously for lap times, you can definitely feel the electronically controlled limited-slip differential, a Corvette hand-me-down that is standard on the Vsport, forcing the rear rubber to dig tenaciously.
The electrically boosted steering isolates, protecting the driver from all but the worst bumps. But it is tuned to supply a natural swell of effort in the corners, while the optional magnetorheological shocks make magic, keeping the body level and bounce-free. However you analyze the ingredients, the net effect is a Cadillac that finally closes the gap on its German counterparts.
The Vsport’s oversquare 3.6-liter runs medium boost, 15 psi, from two Mitsubishi (MHI) turbochargers. The impellers are closely coupled via short conduits to the central airbox atop the engine, which contains two air-to-liquid intercoolers and a single large throttle body. At 6500 rpm, the redline hangs low (it’s 7200 in the non-turbo 3.6), but you don’t need it any higher, what with the torque peak of 430 pound-feet arriving at 3500 rpm.
The Aisin eight-speed transmission offers four shifting modes, including tour, sport, track, and snow/ice. Tour works fine as a relaxed, eco-minded mode, but sport is a little too sporty, locking the transmission in lower gears for far too long as the engine, which is heard partly through the car’s audio system as a recording, wails at high revs. The sportiest modes should be called “track” and “track , seriously.”
An interior of simple forms and deluxe materials echoes European themes. The new CTS is about four inches longer, and rear passengers feel it in their legs. Push the start button and two giant ball bearings fly at you in the virtual gauge cluster, a thin-film-transistor screen with four driver-selectable gauge layouts. In the best layout, the ball bearings resolve into analog gauges with tightly spaced hash marks. The high-res center screen, part of Cadillac’s often-maddening CUE system, has a fast processor to quickly read out the data and navigation/entertainment selections.
Technology and capability don’t come free, and CTS prices are moving up. The menu is complicated by three engines, the choice of rear-drive or four-wheel drive, and three trim levels (Luxury, Perform*ance, and Premium). Basically, the entry-level 3.0-liter CTS has been replaced by a 2.0-liter turbo. The 3.6-liter V-6 starts at $46,025, an increase of $1790 from last year. And the Vsport launches at $59,995. Right now the most expensive CTS is the Vsport Premium, which has almost every CTS option as standard for $69,995, a sum nearly $4600 higher than the old CTS-V. Even the Vsport Premium will eventually be just an intermediate step up to the monster V, the new version of which hasn’t been revealed yet. That car should blow Cadillac’s price ceiling to even smaller shards.
Well, this is what the Germans charge for comparable performance. Now that Cadillac is finally serious about competing at the top level, it should be able to charge serious prices. Excellent job, Cadillac. Welcome back to the fight. Why don’t you take some time off—say, the next three and a half minutes—and then get back to work?