By on May 7, 2012

The Cadillac ATS will have a starting price of $33,990 for the base version equipped with a 2.5L 4-cylinder engine. The ATS will undercut the 4-cylinder turbocharged BMW 328i by $910.

The base engine’s 200 horsepower and 149 lb-ft of torque won’t get too many hearts racing. It’s likely to be used just to lure customers into the showrooms in the hopes of up-selling them to the $35,795 version with a 270 horsepower 2.0L Ecotec turbocharged 4-cylinder. Cadillac’s own press release said little about the 2.5L version, but was careful to tout the 2.0L as being available with a manual or automatic transmission as well as rear or all-wheel drive. The 3.6L V6 powered ATS will cost $42,090, a significant step up, but only an automatic transmission was mentioned. Cadillac’s CUE infotainment system will also be standard.

Having just seen an F30 328i on the street, and being wholly unimpressed with its “shrunk-in-the-wash-528i” looks, I think Cadillac may have an opportunity to finally take on BMW for the small luxury sedan crown. The Audi A4 is making a strong push for the title, but if Cadillac’s performance chops are really up to par, then the buff books (especially the outlets that got their CTS-V Wagon “long term testers”) will be able to crown a new champion, amid a field that includes an aging Mercedes-Benz C-Class and Infiniti G.

Of course, Cadillac has a history of only getting 80 percent of the way there when it comes to competitive products (ahem, CTS Coupe), and any new segment leader would be a reflection of the 3-Series fall from grace as much as any new product’s competence.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

100 Comments on “Cadillac ATS Undercuts BMW 328i By $910...”


  • avatar
    APaGttH

    Wonder if the ECOTEC 2.0L turbo-4 is modifiable to 300 HP and 325 pound feet of torque like they were in the Solstice/SKY. The base HP numbers support the easy tweak and ECM program (premium fuel required) to get the boost in power. That would give you almost 3.6L V6 power while keeping $5K in your pocket and the warranty intact using off the shelf approved GM parts.

    Hmmmmmmm…

    • 0 avatar
      TireIrony

      More importantly, it’d give you that power with a manual transmission.

    • 0 avatar
      ajla

      I have my doubts that GMPP is going to offer the upgrade this time around.

      On the Kappas and Cobalts the turbo was the top option, here it is just the mid-level choice. GM will probably want to protect the V6.

      I also haven’t seen any GM upgrades for the Regal yet, and that’s been out for awhile.

      • 0 avatar
        APaGttH

        The Regal 220 HP offering is different from the 260 HP engine in the Kappa twins. The tweaking to 300 HP is far more difficult. The 255 HP GS is the tweakable engine. Sorry, I can’t remember what the differences are, but someone explained it to me (because I was thinking no problem, get a Regal turbo and pump it up).

        If GMPP doesn’t make it available, the after market industry sure will (but you lose the warranty). My understanding is most of the GMPP upgrade was in tuning.

      • 0 avatar
        ajla

        The GS actually makes 270 hp. I’m guessing that the GS mill will be nearly identical to what the ATS will get.

    • 0 avatar

      I prefer the Cadillac CTS in coupe form, more than I like the Sedan and the ATS. I am glad to see Caddy is wising up and installing the infotainment system on every single car.

    • 0 avatar
      bd2

      The price of ATS includes the destination charge; the BMW 328i starts at $34,900 and has a destinantion charge of $895 – so the difference is $1,805 and not $910.

      Would have liked to see the Caddy undercut the 3 Series by $2k, but this might be enough depending on how much better equipped the ATS is in base form than the 3 Series (the base ATS reportedly will have the CUE infotainment system).

      Also, the pricing is for 2012 3 Series while the ATS is a MY2013, so we’ll likely see a bump in the pricing of the MY2013 3 Series.

  • avatar
    CJinSD

    Ooh Derek! Are you suggesting that GM sought to buy some enthusiasm for the ATS by giving media whores use of CTS-V wagons? Tasty. For better of for worse, before reading the headline I thought this was an awful new Mercedes-Benz. I too saw a new 328i this weekend, and it was an abominable sight. I still think GM is dreaming if they try to charge more for their 2 liter turdo than BMW does. It reminds of a visit to a Cadillac dealer almost a decade ago. It was during ‘employee pricing’ or some other reason to post all the invoices on the wall. The CTS had recently been advertised for $29,990!!! on bill-boards and on TV, but the ones that actually shipped to dealers had invoices over $41K. I recall at the time thinking that the dealer should go across town, buy a bunch of new E46s for less, and try their hands at marking up BMWs and selling them.

  • avatar
    krhodes1

    One minor problem, at least on the coasts. The badge. Doesn’t matter how good it is, that Cadillac badge will keep them away in droves. Will probably sell well in the fly-over states though.

    Not feeling the hate over the 3, 5, and 7 looking like small, medium, and large BMWs. That is what they ARE, afterall. If you can’t tell them apart at a glance, well, you probably are not the target market anyway.

    • 0 avatar
      CJinSD

      “If you can’t tell them apart at a glance, well, you probably are not the target market anyway.”

      Couldn’t disagree much more there. My friends that lease German regularly ask me what they’re looking at when they see a car that they like.

    • 0 avatar
      OldandSlow

      My concern would be resale value. The BMW wins in that department hands down where I live.

    • 0 avatar
      hubcap

      “If you can’t tell them apart at a glance, well, you probably are not the target market anyway.”

      Surely you jest. If you were talking about the BMWs of the eighties and early nineties you’d be right. Today many BMW owners only care about the roundel.

      And as BMW continues to diminish the value of enthusiast dollars their cars will continue to get softer and less appealing.

  • avatar
    TonyJZX

    the first sentence has the faulty GM logic

    the BMW 328i is only $910 more for a turbocharged engine with better power, driveability and economy

    or put it another way, the turbo ATS is $800 more than the turbo 328i

    • 0 avatar
      icemilkcoffee

      Agreed. The 200hp 4 cylinder engine has no place in a performance sedan like this. GM must be delusional to even offer it.

      • 0 avatar
        CJinSD

        It really depends on how refined the engine is. I guaranty it provides more performance than the volume engines in the 3-series, A4, and C-class’s home market. OTOH, the likelihood that GM has produced a 4 cylinder with the NVH sophistication of a Nissan is minute.

      • 0 avatar
        dave504

        Am I missing something about the engine? The base engine in a C250 is 201 hp, as is the same as the base engine in the TSX. The A4 has been offering the same 200 hp 2.0 that has been prostituted out to every VW made in the past 10 years, and they have only been able to get another whopping 11 hp this year after a decade of development. GM is right in line with the competition here.

      • 0 avatar
        jimble

        @Dave504: The base engine might be competitive in horsepower but it’s way down in torque from its rivals. 149 lb-ft is pretty awful compared to Audi’s 258 and MB’s 229. The Acura is not much better than the Caddy at 170 lb-ft, but does Cadillac want to be competing with Acura or with the best?

      • 0 avatar
        30-mile fetch

        Dave504,
        You’re forgetting about turbos & torque, both in regards to the Mercedeas and Audi. They have it, the GM 2.5 doesn’t.

        And the ubiquitous VW/Audi 2.0 will scoot an A4 to 60 in about 6 seconds. The Regal 2.0 turbo can’t get anywhere near that. The 2.5 will be even worse. Some buyers won’t care about such things. But if you do, you’ll notice it.

      • 0 avatar
        hubcap

        I don’t know about the Merc but the base 2.0T in the Audi is Torque rich. It will scoot.

    • 0 avatar
      hairy

      You forgot the destination charge. The turbo 2.0s are exactly the same price: $35,795.

    • 0 avatar
      bd2

      The price of ATS includes the destination charge; the BMW 328i starts at $34,900 and has a destinantion charge of $895 – so the difference is $1,805 and not $910.

      Also, the pricing is for 2012 3 Series while the ATS is a MY2013, so we’ll likely see a bump in the pricing of the MY2013 3 Series.

  • avatar
    stevelovescars

    I am sure Mr. Karesh will add some wisdom about the option equivalence vs. price soon, but my initial reaction was similar, are they smoking crack? Between the brand perception and resale value, it seems to me that Cadillac needs to well undercut the price of the Bimmer to attract new shoppers.

    Based on my own BMW ownership experiences the Caddy will likely cost much less to operate once the warranty has expired but in the meantime their owners will smugly put up with frequent visits to their local BMW service facility. I can’t speak for Cadillacs as I have never owned one.

    For grins I was recently perusing the want ads for used current CTSs and they appear to be, ahem, good used car buys even though most were for sale by dealers.

    • 0 avatar
      CJinSD

      GM had the time-bomb thing down even before BMW. That’s why off warranty Cadillacs have almost never been worth much.

      • 0 avatar
        28-cars-later

        I thought alot of that had to do with lack of confidence in the Northstar… with the exception of the Catera’s various V6 engines the Northstar has been the only game in town for what, 15 years?

      • 0 avatar
        CJinSD

        While you’re right that the Northstar is the predominant current source of Cadillac resale ‘bargains,’ the various HT4100 variants and the V8-6-4 before it were equally disastrous.

      • 0 avatar
        golden2husky

        Unlike those Cadillac engines that CJ mentions, the BMW engines, from a strict mechanical point of view are quite robust. However, the same can’t be said for the secondary parts that BMW uses. Many of these parts, such as a myriad of cooling system components, grommets, seals for intake air, etc. are prone to early failure. And some of those failures, like the expansion tank or the butterfly valve will kill the engine with high temperatures or ingestion of metal parts. Is this one of the reasons why 7 series depreciate like mad? Not sure as 3 series suffer from these same maladies but hold their value much better.

    • 0 avatar

      I haven’t checked, but it’s likely that the Cadillac has much more standard than the BMW. Put another way, when the two are similarly equipped the ATS will likely be a couple thousand less.

      I’ll get the ATS into TrueDelta’s database as soon as enough information is available. There are two to four trim levels for each engine in the order guide, but sometimes they don’t initially offer the lowest ones. So I’m not sure which trim levels these prices are for.

      truedelta.com/pricing

    • 0 avatar
      Silvy_nonsense

      “…it seems to me that Cadillac needs to well undercut the price of the Bimmer to attract new shoppers.”

      Only if Cadillac wants to attract bargain shoppers. Discounting is death to a company trying to project an upscale image. Spending the weekend at Bob Stupak’s Vegas World just doesn’t have the same cachet as a weekend at the Bellagio.

      If the quality is there (or even just the perception of quality), the money will follow.

  • avatar
    espressoBMW

    I’m pleased to see a GM product with polarizing design and some attention to performance. Now if they’re building the quality in also, I’ll probably be taking a test drive.

  • avatar
    alluster

    wow that’s pricey. $33K for a 2.5L 4 cyl? $42K for a 3.6L V6, the same you find in a $24K Impala? Cadillac should have made the 3.6L V6 standard. Would have made the ATS a high powered alternative to the 4 banger 3 Series and A4. Development/Design costs would be lower with one engine choice and so will be manufacturing costs due to less complexity. FE wouldn’t be affected much either.

    How well the ATS performs will come down to lease deals cause around 80% of sales in this segment are leased. That and marketing. Its time the gloves come off.

  • avatar
    DC Bruce

    For $900 more, I would definitely take the BMW. The more interesting comparison would be between the two turbocharged models. I don’t find the two cars either greatly appealing or unappealing in the photos. By comparison, I find the appearance of the current A4 to be right up there with the new US-version Jetta sedan in blandness.

    That said, it seems to me that the “feel” of any 4-cylinder engine is inconsistent with the “luxury car” feel, and I haven’t read anything to persuade me that the newest generation of 4s are any different. I would sorely miss the sound and feel of the M54B30 6-cylinder engine in my BMW. Sometimes its about more than just the raw horsepower.

    It’s unfortunate that, apparently, even with similar displacements, the 6-cylinder engines can not match the fuel economy of the 4s.

    • 0 avatar
      bumpy ii

      For any given displacement, the engine with fewer cylinders will have lower losses to friction and reciprocating mass.

    • 0 avatar
      tced2

      You’re going to get more 4-cylinder engines because the Engineer-in-chief located in the District of Control has dictated such by the CAFE. The Engineer-in-chief would prefer you have a 0-cylinder car with the emissions coming out somewhere else.

      • 0 avatar
        hubcap

        “…because the Engineer-in-chief…”

        I see what you did there.

        You. Are. CLEVER.

        You should be writing for Letterman.

      • 0 avatar
        dts187

        I’m surprised there wasn’t an “Obamaclaus” thrown in there for good measure.

      • 0 avatar
        28-cars-later

        How about an Obozo or Obummer, happy? Sarcasm aside, Washington needs to butt its head in less to the auto industry. Hybrids may have a future but I suspect this EV thing will be the biggest waste of energy and capital since the diesel craze of the early 80s.

    • 0 avatar
      jeffsnavely

      You need to drive some of the current 4-cylinder turbos – they are often more satisfying to drive than 6′s. Why? TORQUE! The low-rpm rush of acceleration is generally way more satisfying than the smoothness of a 6.
      The A4 2.0T is a great powertrain – lots of torque all over the tach.
      The MB C250 – amazing. I had one as a service loaner for a day and it’s much more fun to drive than the C300 6. Very smooth even at high rpm’s and just so much fun with all the torque. On paper this engine has poor numbers but it drives great. Last month one of the mags did a comparo and really dogged it, but I loved it so much on my day drive that I’m thinking of buying one. Why not the 328? It would cost $10k more as the MB has a great USAA discount price plus my club discount means $3k below invoice, and the base car at $32 MSRP is all you need.

  • avatar
    Zackman

    Our beloved 1990 Plymouth Acclaim had a 2.5L 4 cylinder. What’s all the fuss? We only paid $10,600 cash for it! It lasted us 10½ years. I’m not paying 33K+ for the same thing now!

    • 0 avatar
      SlowMyke

      You’re aware there have been other improvements that warrant an increase in price, right? Not to mention inflation…

      • 0 avatar
        28-cars-later

        Name some improvements worth paying for… and I don’t count touchscreen computers, giant rims with paper thin tires, and 100+ airbags as improvements.

    • 0 avatar
      Zackman

      Gentlemen; I was being facetious! I’m a basic Chevy/Ford/Chrysler guy, not a luxury car guy. That’s why I drive an Impala, and may buy another one!

      A four-cylinder Caddy? Ummm…it had better zig…real fast…and be reliable to make it worth the premium price, otherwise stick a big honkin’ V8 in it and say bye-bye to everybody!

  • avatar
    carguy

    It’s hard to judge value until the base equipment and option costs are known. The BMW in base spec is for advertising use only – most end up well over $40K.

    • 0 avatar
      LeeK

      Exactly. Base prices on BMWs are a fantasy number that don’t reflect the reality of sticker prices on dealers’ lots. Several reviews on the F30 328i have mentioned as-tested prices approaching 50k when equipped with the stuff that luxury buyers expect. If Cadillac provides a lot of standard equipment, then it might be an interesting opportunity for GM, but where the rubber meets the road in this segment is in the lease deals. BMW heavily subsidizes their leases and appeal to high cash-flow customers who never have the amassed funds for an outright purchase. They lease the car with a few grand down, pay $500 a month for three years and repeat as long as they are gainfully employed. Combined with the CPO program, it’s a brilliant strategy and has brought BMW much success. Can Cadillac emulate this business mode? I have my doubts.

      • 0 avatar
        George B

        I like the F30 328i, but not enough to pay >$40k. GM can get some sales just by making real cowhide instead of plastic available at all price points. Black vinyl, shorts, and summer heat are a very uncomfortable combination.

        The other thing all automakers could do to boost their Southern sales is to build a dark tint into the side and rear glass. 25% light transmission in the front side glass is the limit here in Texas and adjacent states with 35% legal across the I-10 through I-40 states except California. Dark glass looks good and helps keep the car cool, but aftermarket tint looks cheap as it ages.

  • avatar
    MeaCulpa

    Well that’s MSRP, maybe Caddy has more “air” in the numbers than BMW? Slightly of topic but, what the hell is the point with all these loooong headlights on cars aimed at the US market? Let’s not kid our self, GM will price this thing the hell out of Europe, it’s not an attractive look and it gets old, FAST.

  • avatar
    redliner

    I think the 2.0t should have been the base engine in the ATS. This would put it in perfect and direct competition to the 328i. With the 2.5 four, the ATS looks like it’s trying to compete with the Acura TSX rather than the 3 series.

  • avatar
    Fromes

    If you prefer this over a 328i you might also enjoy hitting yourself in the head with a frying pan. Morans.

  • avatar
    chuckrs

    I don’t understand the hate for the 200hp engine. Cadillac can sell many of these to the non-speed demon majority of buyers. My wife and daughter are very happy with their old A4s at 150 and 180 hp respectively. Not everybody cares about sub 6 second 0-60 times.

    But +1 to the hate for the long headlights – they won’t age well and I’ll bet the cost of replacing a broken one will be substantial.

  • avatar
    wsn

    I remembered that someone compared a Buick Regal to a BRZ in another post. It’s probably time to compare a V6 Camry to the ATS and claim that the Camry is both larger and faster and cheaper.

  • avatar
    tjh8402

    I also don’t get the point of the 2.5 i4, especially since Infiniti offers a 2.5 v6 in the G25 for less $. I agree that we’ll need to see a true delta assisted pricing comparison to truly see how the ecotec compares to the 328 and A4 2.0t when adjusted for features, since the Germans are famous for nickel and diming you to death. Also would like to see a feature/price comparison between the turbo 4 models (ATS, 328, and A4) to the G37 6mt sport. Yes it guzzles gas compared to 4 cylinders, but its also more powerful, quicker, more involving to drive with the most character and personality of any car in this class, and, at its $41k base price, is available only one way – loaded.

  • avatar
    Syke

    Something nobody’s mentioning (and it seems like some people are expecting it to happen right away) is that there’s no way the ATS is going to displace the 3-series tomorrow. Or next week. Right now, GM has so show it can bring out something competitive (better would be nice, but competitive would be acceptable) to be an alternative to the 3 and the A4. Sell it at a profit, and slowly build.

    Any stated expectations past that point have to be coming from people who are determined to see GM fail again. And if you raise the expectations too high and too quickly, failure is guaranteed.

    Keep in mind, that BMW’s are becoming awful cliche-ish anymore. Somebody bringing out an alternative (the A4 is one) that performs well and has desirable driving habits has a chance in the marketplace.

    • 0 avatar
      hubcap

      Agree with all your points and hopefully GM knows this is but a start to a long race. The three series have achieved, for lack of a better phrase, iconic status. GM will need to develop a track record to really compete.

      BMWs are becoming cliquish. But BMW has stated numerous times it would gladly replace enthusiasts with those chasing a badge. They’re simply living up to their word as their cars have gotten softer and less focused.

      IMO the best thing about the F30 is the 328i. It has much of the 335i’s performance for smaller acquisition and operating costs.

  • avatar
    "scarey"

    To me, Cadillacs and four cylinder inline motors should never go together. If they want a 4-banger, why not a sophisticated aluminum V-4 ? Oh, wait ! GM always screws up their attempts at high technology with rookie mistakes, and sours the public on the new idea. Examples- the Oldsmobile diesel, the Cadillac 5-3-1 cylinder engine, Dexi-cool antifreeze, the Vega, the Volt- oops, too early to include that one, but you know what I mean.

  • avatar
    tikki50

    Im just sick of Cadillac offering anything less than exceptional. Its a friggin Cadillac. What part of that brand says “cheap”? Nothing. If you can’t afford one, move on. Honestly this same argument can be said for many up-scale brands, Lexus, even BMW. Why do they sell themselves out for a few more units, while trashing the brand and what it stands for. I recall back in the day when you drove a BMW people noticed, my 325is got lots of looks, and it should have. Today, bah just another BMW, nothing to see here move along… Id rather see a reduction in sales and keep quality across the board high, but atlas we see junk being pushed for the sake of market share and numbers. Same goes for the SRX dont ever ever ever toss in leatherette in yoru cars Cadillac, Your Cadillac not Kia! Not EVERYONE should have a Cadillac.

    • 0 avatar
      28-cars-later

      They ruined the brand decades ago, and it doesn’t look like they are bringing it back. I think RenCen sees it like this: “That’ll be 30K for your Chevrolet sedan, would you like to super size it for 10K more to get our Cadillac value meal?”

    • 0 avatar
      Volts On Fire

      “Im just sick of Cadillac offering anything less than exceptional. Its a friggin Cadillac. What part of that brand says “cheap”? EVERYTHING.”

      FTFY.

      I’d also trust a new Kia to provide 100,000 miles of trouble-free motoring before anything in Cadillac’s lineup. Unlike the Koreans (Daewoo notably excepted) GM isn’t exactly known for learning from its numerous mistakes.

    • 0 avatar
      wsn

      tikki50: “Id rather see a reduction in sales”

      Of course it’s easy for you to say that. What if you are the CEO of the company whose sales is going to shrink. You can try to convince the board that you have improved the image. But you will be fired.

  • avatar
    mcarr

    Not to nitpick, Derek, but I think you’re a few ft. lbs. shy in your 2.5L torque figures.

  • avatar
    slance66

    I saw a new F30 yesterday in white and thought it looked great. But I love the look of the new 5 series. I think we need to wait for “as equipped” comparisons, but I tend to agree that the normally aspirated 4 is a mistake. I’d take a TSX every time over this car with that engine, given the price difference, and reliability expected. That engine might be a nice fit in the Buick Verano.

    So with the turbo models, I’m curious to see how close the prices are. Caddy needs to undercut the BMW significantly. The BMW resale will be better and the brand appeal is better.

    • 0 avatar
      bd2

      Longtime BMW driver and think BMW designs have gone to the crapper.

      The front of the F30 is just disgusting and the front of the 5 Series is bulbous with overly droopy-shaped headlights.

  • avatar
    Volts On Fire

    When I see someone driving a new Cadillac, I don’t immediately think “now there’s a discriminating, well-moneyed buyer who truly recognizes a fine automobile, one who wouldn’t settle for anything less than a Cadillac.”

    No, I think “screaming lease deal” (CTS) and “moron gangsta wannabe” (Escalade.) Either way, not exactly the customer base Caddy is striving for, I’m sure… but it’s the clientele the brand will be forever associated with.

    • 0 avatar
      aristurtle

      Forever? Nonsense. Just fifteen years ago, before the Escalade became a “lyric”, the brand was strictly for retirees who wanted something more upscale than a Buick, and every time you saw a Cadillac you thought “nursing home on wheels”. Before that… well, the point is that Cadillac reinvents its image every couple decades, but still never quite manages to hit what it’s aiming at.

    • 0 avatar
      hubcap

      “When I see someone driving a new Cadillac, I don’t immediately think “now there’s a discriminating, well-moneyed buyer who truly recognizes a fine automobile…”

      And when you see someone driving a BMW, Lexus, Merc or Audi what do you think? After all BMW is known for screaming lease deals and they’re actively pursuing the House Wives set. Are these the “discriminating buyers” who “truly recognize a fine automobile” of which you speak?

      One more thing…I’m sure know one makes a purchasing decision based on what VoF thinks. But if it makes you feel “better” than them…if it’s in some way cathartic for you then please, keep doing it.

      • 0 avatar
        Volts On Fire

        Like it or not, hubcap, my perception is a lot more common than you think. “Know one” seriously considers Cadillac to be a luxury brand any more.

  • avatar
    philadlj

    Three words: ATS review…WHEN?

  • avatar
    Caraholica

    “Having just seen an F30 328i on the street, and being wholly unimpressed with its “shrunk-in-the-wash-528i” looks, I think Cadillac may have an opportunity to finally take on BMW for the small luxury sedan crown.”

    In their dreams.

  • avatar
    stuki

    Given BMW’s voluntarily hamstrung state due to insistence on runflats, you’d think their not so afflicted competition ought be able to beat them dollar for dollar.

    • 0 avatar
      MeaCulpa

      Runflats is possibly the worst thing for regular cars this side of cadillacs early attempt’s at diesel engines. Expensive engineering and materials to get low unsprung weight wasted? Check! Harsher ride? Check! More expensive? Check! Harder to repair? Check!

  • avatar
    sportyaccordy

    Could def be interesting. If GM manages to remain competent in areas the BMW is competent in, and attack where the BMW is weak, they could have a legitimate winner. My money is on GM botching it though.

  • avatar
    Kevin Kluttz

    All I have to say is that you have to remember you are still dealing with GM. They WILL screw it up. A four-cylinder in a Cad. Here goes another Cimarron. Watch and see. Oh, that’s right. I do NOT watch what GM is doing unless they are going down the tubes (hopefully without a bailout next time).

    • 0 avatar
      salhany

      The Cimarron was a clear knockoff of the Cavalier. That’s what doomed it. The ATS, IIRC doesn’t share its architecture with another other division’s platforms.

  • avatar
    dts187

    The ATS with the 2.5 4cyl may be a good subject for a Generation Why article. While us enthusiasts will bemoan the specs on paper, I could see many my age signing a lease on a 2.5 ATS. If the lease deals are competitive with BMW the ATS could provide efficiency, style, and something different than the 328′s and A4′s all of their friends have picked up.

  • avatar
    gasser

    How did GM get the torque down so low on the 2.5 engine?? Internet search (greencongress.com) reports the Chevy Malibu for 2013 has the 2.5 liter ecotec and its good for 190 hp and 180 ft.lbs of torque.
    What gives with the above ATS description??? 150 ft.lbs of torque, really??? I read somewhere that the 4 cylinder turbo is a new engine. I think I might be better off with a proven ecotec than to be a subject in GM’s beta testing of a new turbo which tests not only the technology and the design, but the real world performance of high tolerance/low bid parts.

  • avatar
    reclusive_in_nature

    1. Nothing smaller than the 3.6 should be in a Cadillac.
    2. Poor to middle class people shouldn’t be able to afford a new Cadillac.
    3. The ATS should be a mid-level Buick at BEST.
    4. This vehicle is proof positive that Global Laming/The Pussification of America is real.

  • avatar
    theonlydt

    Agree with the two other posters here questioning the stated 150lb feet of torque. Given that it is likely the 2.5 is the new GM unit with 190-195bhp in the Malibu and 180lb of torque I’m sure with 200bhp in a Cadillac the torque figure has to be reasonably close to that. So, if the engine’s good – why not buy it? Why judge the car based on a chunk of stats before anyone’s driven the thing? If it’s a better proposition than the 3 series and the 4 cylinder drives well, then stop complaining. 200bhp is 200bhp, there’s also weight, gearing, driving dynamics, parasitic losses etc all to take in to account. Summary; wait and drive the thing…

  • avatar
    Buckshot

    Who thinks that this car can compete with the Germans and Lexus?
    Seriously?
    Another cadillac that no one will buy (outside usa).

    • 0 avatar
      hubcap

      A journey of a thousand miles starts with a few steps. I don’t think anyone at GM expects the ATS to outsell the 3 but “ya gotta start somewhere”.

      After all take a look at others who’ve taken on the 3–Lexus (IS), Audi (A4/S4), Merc (C class), Infiniti (G). None have sold more than the 3 but they’re in the game.

      If played right this car can have a grassroots halo effect for Cadillac spurring passion for its bigger cars such as the redesigned CTS (and let’s not forget how good the CTS-V is).

      The biggest wild card is the fickleness of GM management. Will they stick with and continually improve or let it whither on the vine.

  • avatar
    Volts On Fire

    “A journey of a thousand miles starts with a few steps. I don’t think anyone at GM expects the ATS to outsell the 3 but “ya gotta start somewhere”.

    Indeed.

    So… did you also say that when Cadillac introduced the original CTS in 2003? Or the Catera in 1997?

    How about the third-gen STS in 2000? Or the second generation in 1992? The 1988 original, maybe?

    Did you say it when Cadillac introduced the original Seville in 1976?

    GM has had almost 40 years to get this segment right. Their shoes are worn. Time has run out, and the cash is nearly gone. BMW and Audi have nothing at all to fear from the ATS; it’s nearly guaranteed that GM will continuing failing here.

  • avatar
    jetcal1

    Okay,
    So let’s drop the conversation about the base engine. And I’ll tell you why this car with the 2.0T is on my short list.
    I drive 80 miles a day and want a 0-60 anywhere between 6.5-8.0 seconds to facilitate getting onto the freeway. (Dallas drivers leave their manners behind as they drink their stupid soup behind the wheel in the morning.)
    I want a quiet cabin
    I want a stick
    I want to find a reasonably quick car that hides/blends in with crowd and enjoys cheap insurance because of the demographics of the people that buy them.
    So, I’m looking at the following:
    ATS
    Verano Turbo
    Focus SR (Okay, I know it doesn’t sound right here, but demographically, the average buyer is around 50.)

    The reliability of German cars is a joke
    Except for the Mazda3 Speed there is else out there except the TSX?(Have not looked at yet.)
    I am open to any suggestions, maybe a Subaru? (No German cars please, I am done being a masochist.)

    • 0 avatar
      tjh8402

      What’s the budget? What sort of fuel economy are you looking for? Are Swedish cars ok? I’d put a Volvo C30 on the list. From the Japanese, a Lexus IS250 or Infiniti G37 (the TL can also be had with a stick but I’d say isn’t as competitive with the Lexus or Infiniti nor does it make much sense for you over a TSX). The G25 would be great but is unfortunately only available with a slush box. How expensive are your tastes? A non-ST Focus, a base Hyundai Sonata, or a loaded up Cruze would technically match your criteria but doesn’t provide much cachet. Then again, you could always do something radical…a used Pontiac G8 GXP also works >:-D.

      • 0 avatar
        jetcal1

        Looked at the C30, no headroom. G37 is more then what I want to spend. The other vehicles? Well would like to indulge with some flippant interior niceties so the base cars with manual xmsn’s are out. I can spend a fair amount for a car, but the difference between $400 and $800 a month is extra weekend getaways with wife and kids. So, I would say 30-35K.

  • avatar
    Charlie84

    I’m sorry, are they serious? A measly $900 savings versus a 3-series? Wow, that almost makes the 3-series seem like a bargain.

    Cadillac’s 2.5 liter in no way competes with BMW’s new turbo-four and Cadillac’s turbo-four in no way competes with BMW’s turbo-six. This is to be expected. They’re going to have to offer a much bigger cost savings than that.


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Subscribe without commenting

Recent Comments

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Authors

  • Brendan McAleer, Canada
  • Marcelo De Vasconcellos, Brazil
  • Matthias Gasnier, Australia
  • W. Christian 'Mental' Ward, Abu Dhabi
  • Mark Stevenson, Canada
  • Faisal Ali Khan, India