By on June 27, 2016

2015 Cadillac ATS Coupe

The Cadillac ATS has a fever, and the only cure — according to Cadillac — is more value.

Hoping to reverse a sales slide that’s plagued the automaker’s smallest sedan since its debut, Cadillac plans to simplify the model’s configurations and pack each trim level with more goodies, according to a report in Automotive News.

The first thing to drop from the lineup in 2017 is the ATS’s base 2.5-liter four-cylinder engine. By removing the Chevrolet-sourced powerplant, the model’s entry price will rise (by about $1,500), but it allows the automaker to market the standard turbocharged 2.0-liter engine — one that packs competitive power figures.

Adding must-have features like a Bose surround-sound audio system to the base model boosts its value, and would allow the company to (possibly) spur sales without the use of incentives. Cadillacs suffer from so-so resale values, and new vehicle incentives do nothing to help that. Earlier this year, brand president Johan de Nysschen spoke about the company’s need to find a better way to move new models.

The 2017 makeover of the ATS lineup goes further than just a new base trim. Total engine and model configurations shrink from 16 to seven, with prices and trim levels tweaked throughout the lineup. Each offering above the entry-level model should cost between $650 and $1,100 less than before.

Cadillac hopes the strategy makes up for the ATS’s poor launch, which saw criticism leveled at the vehicle’s high price. The launch was followed by rapidly swelling inventories, which required incentives to move the oversupply. That hampered resale values, turning off potential buyers.

As of June 1, the automaker had a 100-day supply of new ATS models.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

179 Comments on “Please Buy Me: Cadillac to Ditch ATS Base Engine, Slash Trims, Boost Value...”


  • avatar
    ajla

    Vee Eight or GTFO. Do the one thing you are good at GM.

    • 0 avatar
      carguy

      Given that this car is about the size of an Audi A3 or MB CLA, a V8 may be too much to hope for.

      However, dumping the 2.5 is a great start but not enough. They also need to make HID headlamps standard and then invest in marketing the ATS not against the 3 series but the A3 and the CLA.

    • 0 avatar

      Why is there so much resistance from people who would never buy this product in the first place to offer V8 engines?

      If I’d designed the ATS-V it would have the Twin Turbo V6 as standard.

      A V8 isn’t necessary here.

      But the XTS and CT6 would definitely offer the same V8 in the CTS-V.

      These people aren’t serious about selling cars.

      • 0 avatar
        tjh8402

        The problem is two fold. First, Cadillac’s powetrains are just not up to snuff when it comes to their NVH characteristics, although the 2.0t is a far more egregious offender than the 3.6. The second problem is that the ATS is failing in the market. Cadillac has tried to follow BMW and it isn’t working. Then again BMW is trying to follow Mercedes and it isn’t working as well for them as it used to. Giving the car a V8 would help with the powertrain NVH and give Cadillac something to differentiate itself from the competition and give it its own brand identity, which is essential for a premium car company since that’s what most people buy on.

        who knows, it might even help their fuel economy. The V8 Camaros and Corvettes already equal if not exceed the V6’s from Cadillac, and that’s despite having far more power than the 325ish hp we’re talking about from a 5.3. The Camaro SS turns in a whopping 5 mpg more on the highway vs its platformate ATS-V, which is over 20% better (23 vs 28). V8s are actually the norm in that class. The C63, IS-F, and RS4 are all V8 powered. BMW and Cadillac are only ones going the turbo six route.

      • 0 avatar
        Paragon

        I’m with BTSR here, in regards to putting a V-8 in an ATS. A twin-turbo V-6 should actually work better. Been hearing on the Allpar boards for at least a year or so that, just like in the 1980s, V-8s will be available in very few cars in the near future. Again as a result of ever more stringent government CAFE standards. Seems they will still be around for trucks, though. And, they will remain available in a limited number of passenger cars as a pricey, high-end performance option for those willing to pay the price for what they want.

        • 0 avatar
          Paragon

          But. wait…is it possible that the next President could put an 11th hour hold on the implementation of the upcoming CAFE standards??? I’d say anything is still possible.

        • 0 avatar
          Dave M.

          I’m not sure why everyone’s panties are in a knot. We now have boosted 4 cylinders making over 200 hp; twin-boosted 6’s making tons more. How much power do you need? Really?

          Out of boredom the other day at a stop light I counted the 4 cylinder cars (as far as I could tell). 80% +/-. Flashing back 20-30 years ago, this is a remarkable number in regards to the fuel savings and efficiency.

          On performance-minded vehicles, an 8 cylinder option certainly is needed. But as standard equipment in non-performance cars? Nonsense.

  • avatar
    seth1065

    Well I am sure this news will make DW happy, not sure how many they sold with the chevy engine anyway, from what I have read the ATS is a pretty good driving car with some bad back seat room, never stopped BMW from selling the 3 series w a small backseat, and a bad dash. Hopefully Caddy can take the long view and realize it will take time to get them back to having people want to lease , most of these are leased I assume their cars and buy them CPO.

    • 0 avatar
      SP

      True, but in this generation, BMW actually made the back seat nice and roomy. So, unfortunately, if anyone is comparison shopping the two cars on that point, the BMW now has the advantage.

      Those of us with kids in car seats are definitely looking at the rear seat room for most of our car purchases.

      • 0 avatar
        bd2

        Yep – it’s all relative.

        The ATS, despite a lower MSRP than the 3 Series doesn’t look to be as good of a value when the 3 Series offers more room and a better interior.

        Even the IS has more rear passenger room as Toyota grew the IS.

        And the new 3 Series will reportedly have even more passenger room.

        All this is nice and all, but doesn’t do anything in fixing the fundamental flaw of the ATS – cramped interior space.

        What will be telling is sales of the CT6 – the 1st RWD Cadillac sedan that offers more room than the competition and not less.

    • 0 avatar
      JohnTaurus_3.0_AX4N

      I agree, I like this car and I was hoping it would do okay. Maybe now it will.

    • 0 avatar
      NormSV650

      I just traded the Verano 2.0T with 6-speed manual for a ATS 2.0T AWD. The fiancé had no interest in learning a manual and the AWD in the ATS was a plus. The handling composure is rock solid and the 3-year Cadillac with 80,000 miles feels like it was carved from a solid it so tight and sound.

      With the ecu left untouched I’ve already seen 36 mph @ 60 mph for most of an hour, two way average. Quite impressive for AWD too!

  • avatar
    davewg

    Still doesn’t fix the too small back seat, the cheap looking gages. The revised pricing might help move the metal for folks that don’t care about those, but still want a great looking, good performing small luxury car.

    • 0 avatar
      kjb911

      I’m 6 feet, I fit in the back of an ATS. While yes it doesn’t have the best rear leg room, I feel like the front seats make up for it with some of the best chairs I’ve sat in in the segment. Hell my midsize Malibu used to have this level of space it seemed so I trade it off considering the CTS is the true mid sizer.

      I just got the GM spec sheet through Global Connect and we are changing the instrument cluster as well as a few changes around the whole car including interior color combos. Morello Red is staying which is great because once my GLI lease is up I’m gunning for a Silver / Red ATS Premium Performance with six speed manual.

      The New Lineup Consists of:

      ATS – CUE 8″ standard with the new collection app, rear view camera, Bose Surround

      Luxury – Navigation, 110 Outlet, Cold Weather Package

      Premium Luxury – Sunroof and a few driver suite options that are not listed

      Premium Performance – Sunroof unless Track package ordered, Magnetic Ride, eLSD

      each trim level has a reduction from $685 up to $1,115 in MSRP.

      • 0 avatar
        derekson

        That seems better, but magnetic ride needs to be on more models along with other features like the HID projector headlights with LED DRLs.

        • 0 avatar
          kjb911

          magnetic ride is available on premium luxury as well as HID. I actually like the standard sport suspension believe it or not.

          • 0 avatar
            NormSV650

            The non-magnetic ride is a bit softer.

            I am also 6-foot and have plenty of head room in the back seat after jumping out of the front seat.

  • avatar
    VoGo

    These are smart moves. But the skeptic in me (my inner DW?) wonders if eliminating the lower trim models is a prelude to the introduction of a new base sedan, i.e., Cimarron II.

  • avatar
    Kenmore

    Do some research, Caddy, and locate well-established Hmong communities. Sell to their old folks.

    Hmong, like all Asians, work hard, do well and the oldest couple of generations would be all like: “Ahh.. nice and roomy!”

  • avatar
    PRNDLOL

    I think this is a competent and competitive car, one I’d actually buy with two years and ~40k km’s on it. I’d never even look at a 2.5 equipped model but I know some people actually prefer that engine.

    A 2015 with the fresh front fascia and 3.6 will likely replace my CTS when it’s time.

    • 0 avatar
      VoGo

      I’m waiting for the 2014 CTS with 3.6 and AWD to fall to $20K. Another 18 months?

      • 0 avatar

        Worked for me, sorta. 2010 CTS, 3.6, perf package, RWD (this gets you the excellent V steering rack, the AWD versions use different parts) $16k before tax, add 2k in catch up work and services-fresh FE3 shocks. If I could install the sport seats from my 330i, it would be perfect. For 18k, you can’t do better..complaints that resonate at the 50k sales price new go quiet at that price.

        • 0 avatar
          VoGo

          You are my hero today.

        • 0 avatar
          CoreyDL

          You know, I can’t believe they kept the front end design on that CTS for so long (through 2013). I don’t want to offend you, but it and the STS just look so_old to me today. I realize 08-14 is only slightly long for a model design, but it was so close to the original version, I think it drug it back in time with it.

          • 0 avatar
            PRNDLOL

            The CTS grille was changed, but unnoticed by many for the 2012 model year.

            http://i248.photobucket.com/albums/gg195/RAB_2008/12Cad-CTS-Sedan-004.jpg

          • 0 avatar
            CoreyDL

            Looks like just more noticeable (bolder) grille slats?

          • 0 avatar

            CoreyDL, I agree…GM should have gone more angular for the third generation, but going more rounded “dead ended” the second gen design. I like the wedge-I can’t do two doors, or I’d have the Coupe. The current Corvette is more arts and sciences than Caddy !!!

            The grille is three slats, replaced by four in later years. I think it looks busy.

            Caddy should have built some of those show cars. They clearly have an interesting design language worked out…but once it comes out of the GM-o-Matic (patent pending) it squeezes all the design vitality out of it.

        • 0 avatar
          PRNDLOL

          I’ve got the 3.6 and FE3 as well. Are you on the Cadillac Owners forum?

        • 0 avatar
          TMA1

          There were some impressive Recaros available on the CTS Performance. Not common, certainly, but maybe you could find a pair for the front.

          • 0 avatar

            someone on the caddy forum did this, but found that the wiring was different…the seats bolted right in but getting them to work was a problem.

      • 0 avatar
        PRNDLOL

        Here’s a 2014 CTS 3.6 V-Sport right now for 25900 CAD but you’d have to deal with the totaled rear end.
        http://www.kijiji.ca/b-canada/2014-cadillac-cts-3.6/k0l0?sort=priceAsc&price=20000__

        • 0 avatar
          CoreyDL

          Funny – in US English it’s “10 foot pole” but translating it to Canadianglish, “10 meter pole” is a considerably more serious statement.

          • 0 avatar
            PRNDLOL

            Oh it’s ten foot pole here too, but I changed it for emphasis before I edited it out then saw your reply oops.

    • 0 avatar
      here4aSammich

      I’m one of them. I buy used and keep my cars. I also have a 110 mile daily commute. I don’t want a turbo or a cvt. Over the 8-10 years and 200k miles I’ll drive, I want something cheaper to maintain. Turbos just don’t make that list.

      • 0 avatar
        CoreyDL

        “I also have a 110 mile daily commute.”

        Oh my gaaaaah. I hope you’ve not calculated how many years of your life you’ll spend in the car.

        • 0 avatar
          duffman13

          He might mean round trip. I hope it’s not one way at least.

          I do 90 round trip, and it’s not terrible. Only 50 minutes or so if traffic works for me. For where I live and work that happens to work out more often than not, which is a rarity in the DC metro area.

          It is rough on the car and you put 22-25k a year of not fun miles on it. You definitely want something durable and reliable with low consumable costs for that kind of commuting. There are a litany of reasons I don’t commute in my S2k more than once a week if you get my drift.

          • 0 avatar
            CoreyDL

            6.6, round trip! And that’s plenty. The other day, I noted that I started my car after work at 4:48. At 5:00, I was in my kitchen.

            90 is a very large number as well.

          • 0 avatar
            duffman13

            I’d love to live closer, but for where my office lives it means either living somewhere with crappy public schools and lower overall quality of neighborhoods, or somewhere way out of my price range. Somewhere with a 12 minute commute would place me firmly in the Marion Barry section of DC.

            For most people in this area, 40+ minute commutes are the norm. A roughly equal-level neighborhood closer in to the beltway would be the same duration commute but slower. I’ll take distance over sitting in traffic every time if those are my options.

          • 0 avatar
            davefromcalgary

            I have a life long abhorrence for commuting.

            Happily I have made it to a stage where my commute is measured in steps.

        • 0 avatar
          here4aSammich

          In all honesty, it’s almost all highway, and city to city. It’s right at an hour each way. I spent more time in the car daily when I lived in the Atlanta suburbs. It’s an easy commute, and easy on the car. current car has a little over 200k on it. On it’s third set of tires and brakes. Change the oil every 5000. But I think the rust that’s finally starting to show will be the end of it.

      • 0 avatar
        NormSV650

        Ask the trucking industry why they use turbochargers for many 100,000’s of miles?

  • avatar
    MrGreenMan

    Proof that GM still has a tin ear and does not listen to their dealers and the dealer sales managers:

    I test drove one of these the day they appeared at LaFontaine.

    The extremely nice woman who showed me the product and let me drive the one with the 3.6V6 AWD combination had three things to say:

    Notice all this crap in the dealership – Cadillac demands it, like the hair salon – nobody really cares except the women who come in for service who can spend the time at the wine bar.

    Notice that one had a good engine. They are going to attempt to sell these things with an I4. BAD IDEA.

    GM has it priced wrong and doesn’t have the lease/financing support to move this like a BMW 325, which is the only way they are going to make this car a winner.

    • 0 avatar
      28-Cars-Later

      I haven’t sampled data in some time but about 40% of the 70 or so trading last year were turbos with mostly sticks. There apparently is a buying/leasing contingent who paid actual money (new) for the 2.0T and 6 spd, I just imagine it isn’t too large given ATS’ overall low sales (even if say 30% of sales were configured as 2.0T and half were 6 spds). In the 70 sample set, I believe four or five examples were 2.5s.

      “GM has it priced wrong and doesn’t have the lease/financing support to move this like a BMW 325”

      I completely agree.

  • avatar
    MrGreenMan

    This car would have been an outstanding Buick Regal.

    • 0 avatar
      Hydromatic

      Isn’t the Regal dead now? Think about that for a moment.

      Caddy should probably say “F&^K IT” and just shoehorn an LS V8 in the ATS. It’ll make the DWs of the world happy. And for it’s next iteration, just stretch the backseat so the Chinese will have their “L” model and the B&B can stop b*tching about the lack of rear room.

      • 0 avatar
        VoGo

        If the ATS comes with length, then who will buy a CTS?

        • 0 avatar
          28-Cars-Later

          Cadillac isn’t in the position to develop a switch-bait model, IMO.

          The brand is down 10-2 in the seventh inning with two outs, it needs several home runs if it wants a shot to win.

          ATS strike one.
          ELR strike two…

      • 0 avatar
        TMA1

        There already is a Chinese L version. Haven’t you heard the “Coming with Length” jokes? That was the motto for the introduction of the ATS-L. The ATS was always designed for the Chinese market first and foremost. That’s one of the reasons the “edges” are so much softer than other Art & Science cars – to appeal to Chinese tastes.

        Oh, and the Regal’s not dead. That’s the Verano. The Regal will be imported from China though, soon enough.

        • 0 avatar
          CoreyDL

          Doesn’t the Regal get an expanded model lineup to include a sports wagon when the new generation comes along?

          • 0 avatar
            TMA1

            That would be shocking. The Verano/Excelle will probably live on in other markets (China), and there’s already a hatchback version of that. Buick is an Asian brand now – do they want wagons?

  • avatar
    tylermattikow

    A step in the right direction. But not enough. Currently it starts at 33,215, going up 1500 gets it to 34,715. The BMW 320 starts at 33150.. While the BMW may be very stripped at that price it’s has plenty of badge snob value. The Cadillac needs to drop to right around 30-31k, which is right at the price of the Audi A3 and Acura TLX.

  • avatar
    30-mile fetch

    These seem like the right moves, but the ATS is still kind of an upstart model from a flagging luxury brand and when you are hobbled by that I don’t know if value and performance matter when going up against established commodities like the 3 series and C Class.

    I wonder this because I just recently had a chance to sample an ex-lease 2013 328i for the first time–I know, what the hell am I doing on a car enthusiast site–and I cannot frankly understand how BMW moves so many of them. Sure, the powertrain is quick and responsive and the chassis capable, but the engine note belongs nowhere near a luxury car, the base seats are terrible, and similar fit & finish can be found in a Golf or Mazda3 that costs half as much. The interior trim creaked and squawked. The car was $40K+ when new three years ago and is now retailing for $24K and the dealership had nearly two dozen of them. Is the ATS really any worse?

    • 0 avatar

      Come Home, DW…all is forgiven :)

      30, you drove what I call the Sales Manager Special. (pre ordered by the sales manager for lot stock…no comparison to what BMW will make to your order if you can wait) Base suspension, seats and engine. Autobox. Premium package, maybe nav. Silver paint, never an actual color….The F30 went cheaper than e46/90 interior..I guess they’ve never seen an A4/C class interior ?

      This is the car you sell the guy moving up from his Accord. You didn’t drive what got BMW the cred it is currently shredding in the market.

      Had you driven a Sport or M package 335i, you’d come away with a different impression, but can I blame BMW for not pushing this car on Accord Guy ?…no, because he would come away with “stiff seats, rides hard”. He won’t get over 75 where the sport suspension goes sweet and the Manager Special gets sloppy.

      The huge supply is because these guys lease, they’ve pumped that pipeline hard, and now, the lot is full of boring BMW (yes, I typed that) with the shiny worn off.

      $40k plus and four cylinders does not cut it, turbos or not. BMW or not-I’ve driven sport package versions of the 2.8, and yes, I’d pay for the six. The power is decent, but the sound is not, and there is that residual vibration the I – 6 does not have.

      The ATS has all these flaws, but without a propeller on the hood. Having said that, if I was bargain shopping, the off lease ATS is now a 20k car, and for THAT price, pretty good deal-just, like BMW, pick your option packages carefully.

      • 0 avatar
        CoreyDL

        This just reminded me – couple weeks ago I was behind a nice dark blurple V6 Accord. The guy had a license plate which was very noticeable (Ohio):

        JAGNEXT

        I thought about that as I sat there. So what you’re saying to the public is you bought a top of the line Accord you didn’t really want, because your next car will be a Jaguar which will inevitably be worse in most metrics? You purchased this tangible item and are downplaying it by telling everyone you want something else?

        • 0 avatar
          CincyDavid

          I’ve seen that Accord too…wonder how long he’s had that plate. I’d laugh myself sick if he’s put it on a whole progression of Hondas over the years, and may never own a Jag.

          • 0 avatar
            CoreyDL

            I wanted to get a pic, but it was a right on red, so he wasn’t stopped long enough. Saw him at the corner of 42 and Cornell in Sharonville – maybe I’ll come across him again.

            I like that Cincinnati is small enough that you’ve got two people on a car site who have seen the same person.

        • 0 avatar
          SP

          Maybe he is a big Jag fan. But with old XJ values the way they are, there’s little reason not to be driving one right now.

          Or maybe he is in the Navy and trying to make Judge Advocate General.

          Or maybe he works at the DMV and that is what he mutters when he sends a customer packing. “Jag… NEXT!”

      • 0 avatar
        tjh8402

        I tend to agree with you @Speedlaw. The 328i and ATS 2.0T are fantastic buys at $25k used at Carmax. Put a long warranty on them and have a good day. For $25k, a RWD 4 cylinder used car sounds arguably more appealing than a 4 cylinder FWD new car. But at $40-45K? With an engine that might as well have been in a Hyundai? No thanks. Were I in the market for a new car, I’d do everything I could to figure out how to survive with a 2 door Mustang or Camaro. Same or superior chassis and better powertrains. The Camaro and Mustang are both outselling the 3 series this year by a wide margin. Despite this year not being the Camaro’s best, it has still sold 5k more cars than the 3 series while the Mustang is obviously in a different league. Yes, they have some much cheaper models, but they are also far less practical. Makes me wonder what 4 door variants of those cars (with reasonable powertrains) could sell like.

      • 0 avatar
        30-mile fetch

        I agree, and I knew this was the cynical lease queen special, but I still didn’t expect so many fundamental problems in such an expensive car. I was expecting a somewhat nicer GLI and didn’t find it. $40K is a lot of money to spend on a car with flat, rock-hard, unsupportive seats and white plastic door handle and dash trim that creaks when touched or going over bumps. It was disappointing even at $24K used. Makes a $27K brand new GTI look absolutely brilliant.

        I’d rather have the Accord than this spec 328, and I’m being dead honest about that. Only when arcing down a mountain road would it be an upgrade from an Accord, but since that’s a highly atypical use I’m not sure how any potential customer that comes back from a basic test drive doesn’t just politely hand the keys back to the salesman and plop back into his/her Honda. Or at least go down the street and cross-shop an ATS with an open mind.

        • 0 avatar
          TMA1

          You’d be shocked how many people just want to look wealthy (in their own delusional minds), and are willing to do so with the cheapest available BMW or Mercedes.

          I see these cars on the road all the time. They might not have a garage/driveway to park it in, but at least they ballin’.

          • 0 avatar
            Luke42

            Yes, but anyone can *spend* money.

            Its making it and saving it that’s hard. Just like.my dad said, the way to become wealthy is to not spend it*.

            I’m not very impressed by merely picking something expensive off the shelf.

            So, yeah, the last thing I think when I see a lease gray 3er is “that person must be rich”. It’s usually ” don’t cut me off, don’t cut me off, don’t cut me off, vanity is expensive.”

            * Investing != spending

        • 0 avatar

          And I think I’m being churlish when I wonder why my e46 has a much nicer interior (component quality, not design) than the F30.

          Badge buyers….so much a force than Mercedes made a car “just for them”.

          • 0 avatar
            tjh8402

            @speedlaw – the impressive part is how well Mercedes has actually made that all work for them. The badge buyers get their car. Meanwhile, the C class, no longer forced to serve as the entry level Benz, gets a thorough revamp. It’s now being called a Mini S Class. Car & Driver says best interior under $60k. Meanwhile, C class sales are up despite internal competition from the CLA as the cheapest new Mercedes. Perhaps that’s instructive. I’d gladly accept a FWD Mini based 1 series sedan if it gets us a proper 3 series again, but I doubt BMW really will. Those of us who loved our E46 sedans are still waiting for a replacement.

  • avatar
    28-Cars-Later

    Cadillac is so entertaining.

    We’re dropping the embarrassing base motor in the base model of the embarrassing ATS but… the base model price will rise by $1500! Yet conversely the price will fall by up to $1100 for higher trims!

    • 0 avatar
      CoreyDL

      In your opinion, which is more jokey, the cramped and too small and too costly ATS – or the Regal, which has the same complaints?

      On the one hand, the ATS does handle well, and is RWD. And the Buick is stylish looking, even if too small. But the Pontiac gauges and lack of quality in the ATS is very unbecoming. I’m unsure about Regal quality.

      I can’t decide which is a bigger joke, leaning more towards ATS because of the badge it aspires to represent on the (af)front.

      • 0 avatar
        VoGo

        Most people will vote ATS as the bigger joke, because they associate the Cadillac brand with long, spacious vehicles.

        Personally, I don’t consider either a joke. 90% of the cars I see have empty back seats. So if you are buying a car with the intent of only occasional back seat use, why over-invest in a car larger than you need?

        I realize I’m in the minority on this issue today, but a generation ago, the Olds Cutlass was the best selling car, and had a tiny back seat that was difficult to access.

        • 0 avatar
          CoreyDL

          More car is the American way! It’s deemed successful and desirable to have more car than you need. AWD/4×4, seven seats, V8, locking diffs, and the parking lot at Eddie Merlot.

          Just like money – would you rather have -just- enough, or lots extra?

          PS. I never liked the Cutlass, I did not find that a stylish or appealing car. I think the Regal was better, and didn’t particularly like that either. I came home from the hospital when I was born in an ’85 Regal coupe. Dark blue with blue cloth. A little less than two years later my sister would come around, and by then my mom was pretty fed up with two car seats in the back of a Regal.

          Dynasty away!

          • 0 avatar
            VoGo

            You are correct, as usual.

          • 0 avatar
            Kenmore

            How ’bout longer wheelbase & greater weight = smoother ride and, even today, a taller roof and greater interior volume commensurate with the length?

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            “More car is the American way!”

            Then just buy a crewcab pickup. LOL

          • 0 avatar
            CoreyDL

            You’re channeling that other Canadian we have here today!

          • 0 avatar
            bumpy ii

            “Just like money – would you rather have -just- enough, or lots extra?”

            Just enough. “Lots extra” means everyone and their cousin will be pestering you for loans and favors, suggesting investments, running scams, etc.

        • 0 avatar
          sportyaccordy

          Why buy a 4 door car at all if the back seat is no bueno? Get a 2+2 coupe or a full on 2 seater.

          The ATS back seat is just not good. It has less total legroom than my 09 Civic sedan, which is just borderline. I can sit behind myself at 5′ 9″ with about 2″ of space for my knees. It also has less legroom than the E90 it benchmarked and is totally culo blasted by the F30.

          I am 100% on board with not buying the most metal you can get for the money… I could have easily got a huge Accord for what I paid for my Civic. But on the flip side, and by the same logic, seems pretty silly to pay for a back seat that is uncomfortable, especially when that small backseat yields no benefit. They could have made it bigger and not affected the car at all. 50-100 extra lbs. It’s the previous gen Malibu all over again.

      • 0 avatar
        28-Cars-Later

        This is tough as its a Hitler/Stalin argument. Hmmm….

        I’ll go with Regal being the bigger joke. The model was brought over with minimal tweaks from being an Opel, which on its own is inappropriate for USDM, but then to top it off they price it to the sky with all those deficiencies. Even VAG learned its Euro spec models, for less money than the Regal, were not working so they devised a Jetta/Passat more suited to the USDM. GM says aw screw it they looooove Opels.

        The Alpha platform is sadder but not a bigger joke per se. Pontiac was supposed to get a new Grand Am which I suppose was going to function along the lines of poor man’s Cadillac “sport sedan” (remember Sigma Catera launched in 2003). Pontiac gets folded during product development, so the platform is retooled and expanded for Cadillac/Chevrolet V6/V8 use which may or may not have been a wise move. Then it is introduced as an E46 benchmarked “sport sedan” but the trouble being its competition had moved on to selling something closer to what the Sigma Catera already was in its 3-series models (at least in terms of size, value etc). Cadillac also screwed up many of the details on launch and now the model just can’t catch a break.

        So maybe what I am saying is GM tried with Alpha/ATS and just made too many bad decisions with it despite the financial investment and fine work of its engineers. Regal was, we need to get more from loss making Opel production, so here give them this badged as [insert brand] and oh put tons of money on the sticker as well. Oh and let’s not draw attention to the fact we’re launching a BPG Cruze at the same time.

        Additional: Everyone seems to love the Alpha chassis but hates everything else about it, maybe in the future we will see Alpha enthusiasts who take the time to correct all of the non-chassis related problems with the model and give them new life.

        • 0 avatar
          CoreyDL

          Good points. The ATS gets a B- for effort, while the Regal is on the less stringent Satisfactory/Unsatisfactory grade scale.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            Regal also had all sorts of quality issues when it first launched. The Cadillac Alphas did as well but I think the most serious ones were related to the 2.0T which you can just avoid used.

  • avatar
    tjh8402

    Crazy idea as it sounds, I still say Cadillac should give a 5.3 V8 powered ATS a chance here. If an LT1 powered Camaro on the same platform with 450+ hp can get 28 mpg highway with a six speed auto (better btw than the similarly powerful 3.6 TTV6 ATS-V and only 3 mpg City/2mpg worse highway than the N/A 3.6 V-6 ATS), no reason that if you give the ATS a 300-325 hp 5.3 with AFM and some active aero tricks and it shouldn’t be able to exceed 30 mpg with either an 8 speed auto or a 6 speed manual. Do buyers want really want V8s? Who knows, but what they are selling now obviously isn’t working. It gives Cadillac something to distinguish itself from the competition. They’ve already got a 3 series beating chassis. Now give it a 3 series beating powertrain. While the N20 is a dull, uninspiring engine, it is better than the Cadillac 2.0t whose NVH would embarrass a Ford Focus. With the 5.3, for $45k, you can either have a 240 hp 4 cylinder BMW with an inferior chassis or a 315 hp V-8 Cadillac with the superior chassis. Market the snot out of that. Probably can’t undercut the Charger R/Ts $33k price to be the least expensive V8 sedan or the Challenger’s $31k price for least expensive V8 car, but could certainly be the least expensive V8 premium car.

  • avatar
    gasser

    How in the world does GM market these cars??
    I looked at the ATS when it came out. Very small, both width in the front seats and in rear leg room, but no worse than previous BMW 3 series. But a Chevy engine?? This made the 2.0T more likely, but too rough. So no ATS.
    A few months ago I dragged my wife to GMC dealer looking for a cheap SUV and they had a deal on the Terrain.
    Nice styling, plenty of room, good steering and brakes, but the 2.4 I-4 was a dog. Why not pick the 3.6 V-6?? Well to upgrade to the V-6 required moving from the SLE to the SLT (+$1500) and then the engine upgrade (+$1500) and then a loss of the discounts (+$2000).
    Please explain to GM the difference between price and value.

    • 0 avatar
      Featherston

      I actually was thinking about this bigger issue a day or two ago: What’s the least expensive intra-model engine upgrade you can get on the US market these days? Unpleasant or not, $3,000 plus equipment you may not want or need is par for the course these days. For example:
      – Fiat 500: $2,705 to go from a Pop (base) to a Turbo.
      – 3-series: $5,200 to go from a 320i to a 328i.
      – Accord: $8540 to go from the cheapest LX to an EX-L V6.

      This is an industry-wide phenomenon, not a GM phenomenon.

      Probably the least expensive upgrade is to go from a V6 Mustang to a 2.3T Mustang, but it’s debatable that that actually gets you a better engine for real world driving.

      I’m curious as to what the inflation-adjusted costs were back in the days of models with an I6 and multiple V8s. Back then, of course, you typically had more of an opportunity to order performance-only upgrades, such as when optioning your Chevy B-body as a “Bisquick”.

      • 0 avatar
        Dan

        Pickup trucks are the only consumer vehicles left where they’ll sell you the good engine alone without another $5,000 of cabin fluff but even there the CAFE compliance tax is getting awfully steep awfully fast.

        The V8 in a Ram is $1,650.

        The larger V8 in a Tundra is $1,700.

        The small V8 in a Chevy is $1,200, the 6.2 is $2,700 and you can’t have the good one without the $9,400 LTZ package on top of that.

        Ford is about the least offensive with their twin turbo 2.7 a clear loss leader at $800. The V8 is $1,600 and the larger turbo 3.5 is $2,300. But they get you on the other end with a $500 upcharge for a reasonable axle ratio.

        It wasn’t all that long ago that the good engine was less than 1,000 dollars on the sticker and often as not had a package incentive to make it effectively free. Thanks Obama.

      • 0 avatar
        Prado

        Possibly the Ford Fusion. The 1.5 Turbo is barely more expensive than the 2.5. I think it was in the 500-1k range.

      • 0 avatar
        Featherston

        Dan & Prado, good information.

        Re: the Fusion, you actually have to go from the S to the SE before the 1.5T becomes available, so that’s a $1,000 jump (trim) plus $900 more (engine).

  • avatar
    LS1Fan

    The ATS is a Corolla, minus the brand prestige and the positive style.

    Cadillac isn’t a luxury brand. There it is, in black and white.

    GM thinks it’s premium enough to fight BMW. The rest of the car buying public knows better.

    So they need to start over.
    Cadillac needs to get back to the American land yacht business. That’s the one area of the market Cadillac has instant credibility : if they made an S class competitor at ATS prices and a 2 door Eldorado model alongside their existing Escalade, they’d carve out a unique market position.

    One things certain: making copycat BMWs and charging Audi prices is only going to get a Saab result.

    • 0 avatar
      sportyaccordy

      Cadillac has shown that it knows what the public wants, but for whatever reason it never delivers. A lineup made of production ready versions of the Imaj, Elmiraj, Ciel, Sixteen etc would kill. Caddy doesn’t seem to grasp that “as good as” is not enough. To get the brand back to any level of respectability outside of the Escalade (which should be spun off into its own sub brand) they have to go above and beyond above and beyond. Every Cadillac should make people stop and stare, and should amaze with its tech. Nobody wants a store brand 3 series for even fire sale prices if they have to deal with CUE, a tiny back seat and a completely anonymous design.

      • 0 avatar
        George B

        sportyaccordy, Cadillac’s problem is that GM used to be a much larger car company and all the legacy costs and mindset from its glory days are holding it back. Cadillac is capable of making impressive looking concept cars, but their production models have to be built to a relatively low price point. However, legacy costs don’t explain the disaster that is CUE or the getting the rear seat legroom wrong.

    • 0 avatar
      28-Cars-Later

      This.

      “One things certain: making copycat BMWs and charging Audi prices is only going to get a Saab result.”

      Cadillac: Just another Saab story.

    • 0 avatar
      seth1065

      A S class competitor at the ATS price?? are you serious ??????? I think your smoking what DW was smoking last week

      if they made an S class competitor at ATS prices and a 2 door Eldorado model alongside their existing Escalade, they’d carve out a unique market position.

      • 0 avatar
        TMA1

        OK, but maybe at Genesis/Equus prices, or somewhere in between. Hyundai/Kia is making better luxury cars than Cadillac right now.

        • 0 avatar
          sportyaccordy

          I think the Genesis is outselling the ATS/CTS too (individually). Imagine what it could do with a quasi legit luxury brand like Cadillac.

          • 0 avatar
            tjh8402

            ATS Sales figures:
            2013 38,319
            2014 29,890
            2015 26,873
            2016 YTD 7884

            Genesis sales figures:
            2013 32,330
            2014 29,992
            2015 31,374
            2016 YTD * 14,989

            FWIW Hyundai doesn’t separate the Genesis Coupe from Genesis sedan

            Also worth comparing is Cadillac’s critically panned overpriced Impala, the XTS which is more in line with the sort of car the Genesis is, and is almost selling as well the ATS (beating it this year in fact) and with its Chevy parts content, is probably generating more profit.

            2013 32,559
            2014 24,335
            2015 23,112
            2016 YTD * 8603

  • avatar
    tjh8402

    Another thought about where the market is going – we always use the 3 series as the benchmark in this entry level premium sedan class because it’s long been the critical favorite and at the top of the sales charts. It’s worth noting though that the class has moved away from BMW and sporting cars. BMW may be falling a bit victim to their have it both way acts (market as the ultimate driving machine while actually be a soft luxury car).

    Despite the growth in the market, the 3 series is not actually seeing sales growth. Aside from 2014’s stellar year, the F30 has consistently undersold the E46 and E90. It does make you wonder how much the ATS bugs BMW. No it doesn’t sell nearly as well, but it probably is taking buyers who likely would’ve gotten a 3 series instead. Give the 30kish ATS sales back to BMW and the F30 is at least matching, if not exceeding its predecessors.

    The sales leader in this class now is the critically acclaimed (as a comfy premium feeling luxury sedan) Mercedes C class. Lexus is selling nearly as many ES’s as BMW sells 3 series, despite the ES being a warmed over Avalon (those cheaper bones and Lexus’s higher residuals means I’m guessing they are making far more $ off the ES than BMW does the 3). Worth noting is that both the C class and ES have some internal competition as an entry level 4 door from the CLA and IS respectively, whereas the 3 series is by far the least expensive BMW sedan you can buy. With luxury being a traditional Cadillac virtue, perhaps they should’ve gone more the route of the C Class and ES rather than chasing BMW in the sadly shrinking performance sedan class.

  • avatar
    Featherston

    How exactly is the 2.5 a “Chevrolet-sourced” engine? A corporate engine also used by GMC and Chevrolet? Sure. Not class-appropriate? Sure. (At this point BMW, Lexus, Mercedes, and Audi all use 2.0T’s as their base engines in the US market, yes?) Chevrolet-sourced? No, not really, unless you’re ascribing some sort of permanent Bowtie status to Tonawanda, New York.

    • 0 avatar
      DweezilSFV

      Thank you. GM Powertrain. Not Buick, Chevrolet or Cadillac. The last 2.5 4 was the Pontiac V8 derived and designed Iron Duke.

      The 2.2 Ecotec was a global effort with input from GMNA, Saab and Opel. A corporate effort. Similar input for the new 2.5 and it’s variants: an engine family for use all over the world.

      • 0 avatar
        PrincipalDan

        Some of my Dad’s cousins took an old Iron Duke and some scrap iron and welded together a garden tractor out of it. Shortened rear axle, truck tires, etc.

        Having owned an Iron Duke powered Chevy, that was the best use of an Iron Duke I had ever seen.

      • 0 avatar
        Truckducken

        See, that’s the problem right there. Anyone old enough to consider a Cadillac purchase is old enough to have Iron Duke flashbacks at the sight of the number 2.5 in anything from the General. GM needs an internal edict to never make another 2.5L 4-banger again (OK, at least not for another thirty years until old farts like me die off).

        • 0 avatar
          JohnTaurus_3.0_AX4N

          Well, if the new 2.5L is decently powerful and has the longevity of the Iron Duke somehow baked in because it has the same displacement, that sounds like a winner.

          The Iron Duke was good for what it was, a cheap economy car engine. It was marketed as such.

  • avatar
    TMA1

    I can’t believe there were as many as 16 configurations for a car no one was buying. That is too complex. And Cadillac is terrible about explaining what the various trims are about. I know there’s a Perfomance trim and a Luxury trim, but what does either one stand for? Something as simple as, “Luxury has all the features of the base model, plus…” would be useful to anyone who is interested.

    The important thing to know is that CUE can only be avoided on the base trim.

    • 0 avatar
      duffman13

      16 configurations accounts for standard, performance, luxury, and premium with each engine/transmission/drive-wheel combo available.

      When you consider for example the performance trim can have 2 of 3 engines, both transmission types with RWD, and available AWD with the auto only, that’s 5 possible configurations for that one trim.

      • 0 avatar
        TMA1

        I bet there are some variations on that as well. The lowest trim might lock out AWD or the V6, while 2.5 might be locked out of higher trims. Like I said, too complex. And who knows what you’d actually find on dealer lots. Probably not many options, given that SUVs are far more popular than tiny sports sedans. I don’t see the ATS on the road often, but when I do, it’s the 2.5 version. I assume that’s what dealers are stocking.

    • 0 avatar

      I’ve always thought this is intentional, so that you have a hard time cross shopping. Acura has three/four variants, that is it, but if you try to compare here, the chances of two cars being the same are pretty small. Security (of prices) through obscurity (of apple-apples comparison)

  • avatar
    Lorenzo

    Cadillac needs to appeal to young AND old as an aspirational nameplate. Marketing to millennials who don’t have the money to buy now just means when they’re older, Cadillace won’t want them, just as it doesn’t want that older demographic now, the group that can punch up sales NOW since they have the money.

    The biggest fallacy of the older demographic dying off is that it’s continually replaced by young people who just couldn’t stop getting old, no matter how hard they tried. Many of them got wealthier too, and could afford more than a Chevy or Toyota.

    If Cadillac can get its head screwed on straight, it’ll develop smaller models loaded with tech and a lower price for the few millennials who can afford a new car, and keep building the bigger, powerful, comfortable statement cars for the older demographic, but easier on the latest tech toys and better seats and entry/exit for those older bodies.

    It’s not an either/or proposition, Cadillac needs both customer bases, with sporty, stylish smaller models that say “I’m on my way” for the younger customers, and more elegant, comfortable cars that say “I’ve arrived”, for the older demographic.

    • 0 avatar
      28-Cars-Later

      “If Cadillac can get its head screwed on straight, it’ll develop smaller models loaded with tech and a lower price for the few millennials who can afford a new car”

      In all seriousness I think this is the grand strategy.

      • 0 avatar
        DweezilSFV

        Sadly. That’s Chevrolet territory. Call it the Cadillac 110. Or Clipper.

      • 0 avatar
        tjh8402

        Has worked for Audi and Mercedes with the A3 and CLA. Lexus’s best sellers $ have for most of their history been some variation of a rebadged Camry. The new Malibu is getting really good reviews. Maybe its time to tempt fate and try to shake the Cimarrons ghost once and for all.

  • avatar
    Stugots

    My wife’s car is an ATS with the 2.5L engine. It is the second one we’ve leased. We found it to be a really nice car, with decent power and outstanding fuel economy. Never had a bit of trouble with either of the two ATS’s. Now that I’ve heard this news, I’ll probably start hunting for a 2016 2.5L model that we can put her into for another two years. Admittedly, she is not a car enthusiast, but for her it feels like just the right combination of luxury and sport. She loves the size too, although we almost never have a reason to use the back seat. I think she also enjoys the fact that these are pretty rare on the road, and she seems to get lots of compliments. As you can tell, we are pretty big ATS fans!

    • 0 avatar
      28-Cars-Later

      I’m waiting for… sike this is Johann I’m just trolling DW.

    • 0 avatar
      seth1065

      That is a very good point Stunts and that is who caddy wants to sell to, thanks for chiming in as a real owner of a car we just rip to shreds, as someone else commented at 50K you can complain at 23K and a few years old your complaints fall on deaf ears.

    • 0 avatar
      Paragon

      While I do get a benefit from hearing people’s thoughts and opinions, hearing from an actual owner is what really counts. Thanks for sharing your real-life experience, ie, that of your wife.

      “Ask the man who owns one.”

  • avatar
    JEFFSHADOW

    Jettison the alpha-numeric naming system and return to the quality vehicle names of the past. I would never buy a CTS, ATS, XTS or CT6 for that matter. I have three Eldorados (1983, 1985 and 2000 ETC; at least the “ETC” badging appears along with ELDORADO!)
    It is time to stop copying the Europeans and Asians.
    Even the DTS name made sense because it was on a car with stature, substance and style. I do miss the 2011 Cadillac DTS and Buick Lucerne.

    • 0 avatar
      DweezilSFV

      Deville Touring Sedan sounds a lot better than DTS: Ditz.

    • 0 avatar
      LIKE TTAC.COM ON FACEBOOK

      They saved four and a half bucks per car by making the name badges smaller. Multiply that by 30,000 of each model per year, and you’re talking some serious corporate profit! Bigger bonus checks for the executives!

      And by selling fewer cars, there’s a lot less corporate money being used to pay commission to the salespeople. More profits!

  • avatar
    jdmcomp

    I did go look at this car when it arrived. Too Caddy on the inside and too Caddy on the outside. You may feel you are the direct compete with a BMW or Merc but until you earn your bones you cannot charge that kind of money for the car. Now that others have gone to DI T 2.0L engines Caddy would have the advantage if they make a V6 standard. The 4s still lack lowend umph and still make the 4 cyl shake noise and rattle. I drive my wifes Optima some, and its engine is the equal of the Merc or BMW most if not all of the time.

  • avatar
    PrincipalDan

    the model’s entry price will rise (by about $1,500)

    Hear that? That’s the sound of faxes being sent to Cadillac dealerships all over the land telling them that when the new base trim arrives at $1500 higher MSRP there will be $1500 in incentives on the hood.

    • 0 avatar
      CoreyDL

      “Dont You Want Me Baby” by the Human League came on my Zune as I read this, and I realize how applicable it is to this car/article.

      • 0 avatar
        TMA1

        Zune, that is so cool. I just got a new Walkman. So much better than using a phone!

        • 0 avatar
          CoreyDL

          It’s reliable, doesn’t run out of battery like my phone will, and holds way more stuff! I am convinced the all-in-one service of the phone is stretching it too far.

          • 0 avatar
            Adam Tonge

            The phone companies and telecom providers want you to use the cloud and stream stuff. Then they can tell you what to listen to and when you can listen to it.

          • 0 avatar
            CoreyDL

            I want all of the files. And I don’t want to listen to a McDonald’s commercial between songs if I don’t pay!

          • 0 avatar
            TMA1

            I just love having physical buttons again. I can reach into my pocket and hit the “next” button. Beats pulling out a large phone, selecting the right app, and hoping it registers my finger. The whole interface is so much faster, which is much easier to deal with.

  • avatar
    05lgt

    Umm, did I miss DW getting the banhammer?

  • avatar
    derekson

    Ditching the horrid base engine will help the ATS. I haven’t seen the specific pricing, but what they need to do is price this car against the Merc CLA and the Audi A3. It will seem like a bigger alternative to those cars, with a sporty RWD chassis, rather than an American E90 3 series with cheaper interior bits and a cramped back seat.

  • avatar
    Freddie

    Do a reverse Cimmaron. Make it a Chevy, give me the 2.0T and a stick for under $30K and I’ll buy it.

  • avatar
    Davekaybsc

    It’s a start at least, but Cadillac – LEARN THE LESSON from Ford. The Fusion and MKZ got stupid touch controls. Everybody hated them, and when Ford did their mid-cycle updates, guess what? The touch buttons are GONE! Imagine that! Listening to your customers? What’s the world coming to?

    You kicked the 2.5L out, great. Now DUMP that horrible gauge cluster and scrap your center stack and START OVER. Put BUTTONS and KNOBS on it. I’m a potential ATS buyer, but that gauge cluster and that center stack and CUE puts the ATS completely off the table for me. I’m not even walking in the door.

  • avatar
    Big Al from Oz

    For GM to differentiate Caddy it MUST come up with and engine that is Caddy and not Chev, etc. Even the Silverado Station wagon Escalade needs to be Caddy and not Chev.

    Why doesn’t GM just design a great in line six for Caddy?? Caddy and GMH develped the 3.6 for themselves and SAAB had a smaller variant of the engine. But GM is using this engine from a pickup to a Camaro. It’s lost it’s prestige.

    Cadillac to many is just an overly expensive Chev.

    People buy BMW, Mercedes Benz, etc because of product differentiation, prestige. The olden boys of yesteryear who still think of Caddy as this huge V8 monster are kidding themselves. Caddy needs to attract the newbee’s into the show room. Lattes are just not enough with that Andy Warhol/Kinks/Soho approach. That approach has a cheap and chintzy fell about it.

    Fake.

    There is not enough perceived product differentiation between Caddy and the rest of GM.

    • 0 avatar
      Adam Tonge

      An inline six wouldn’t get better MPG or produce more power than the 5.3L V8. The High Feature V6 was never developed just for Caddy/Holden. The 3.6L was available in other vehicles at the same time (Buick Rendezvous, Buick Lacrosse, etc).

      The push rod V8s are more than adequate for duty in Cadillacs. The problem is that GM chooses not to put them in the Caddy sedans, except for in super performance versions. GM does not need to spend money developing DOHC V8s when they have the LT V8.

      • 0 avatar
        Big Al from Oz

        Adam,
        I’ll buy the Buick line, as Holden (even Opel to a degree) are “Buicks” so to speak in the eyes of GM.

        My comment is there isn’t enough product differentiation in GM. Caddy is known by all to be a GM. GM also doesn’t have the name as Toyota with Lexus or even Honda with Acura. These two brands do have a perception of being a better vehicle by the general public, so a “flash” Toyota or Honda will do well.

        Nissan is similar to GM with Caddy in that Nissan with Infinity. To the masses these brands are not as well regarded.

        Don’t just look at GM’s numbers sold. FCA sells quite a few vehicles and yet FCA is not reknown for prestige of late.

  • avatar
    jjster6

    A Cadillac story and not a single comment from DeadWeight. A sure sign of the apocalypse.

  • avatar
    vegavairbob

    It’s very simple. Cadiilac competes with, among others, BMW and Mercedes Benz. The two German brands together have equal shares of almost 50% of the luxury market for themselves. Cadillac has about 7%. The bottom line is the percieved status of these two German brands are higher, therefore Cadillac’s lease payment must be lower despite Cadillac’s current competence, but the company’s anemic base 2.5 liter engine should have never found its way into the ATS. When will GM learn? And why is the back up camara an option in the four door? Really?

    • 0 avatar
      NormSV650

      And Lexus IS250 fits where?

      Cadillac/Buick sold about 50,000 units more than BMW, Lexue, and Mercedes in the $30,000 and up areas. They are making money hand over fist I’m sure.

  • avatar
    Jaeger

    Dumping the base 4-pot was a no-brainer. Including it in the first place in a supposedly premium luxury / sports sedan suggests no brains. The ATS is a pretty decent offering so long as you don’t have friends – or your friends don’t have legs. More of a 2 plus 2.

  • avatar
    ZCD2.7T

    I suppose this is one-quarter step in the right direction, but the fundamental issue for the ATS is the platform itself – GM prioritized handling over practicality, which makes for good performance stats, but crappy sales.

    The ATS engenders compromises not suffered by the bulk of its current competition.

  • avatar
    mazdaman007

    OK, I just skipped through the comments and no DW in a Caddy post ? Mark, can I have my lifetime subscription fee returned please.

  • avatar

    the cadillac only makes top of the line car

  • avatar

    There is hope. I got a 328i loaner car yesterday when my 330i was in the shop for wheel alignment (bring a 3 with over 300k to my local dealer and they act all puppies and kitties probably because you are the polar opposite of the typical service customer ). Some odd quirk of fate got me a car with two options…the parking assist and sport package. Alas, still autobox. The trans was great. The steering was electric, and there was too much slop in the suspension (it was an Xi)…my ancient 3 is better, back to back. The four makes good power but with way too much drama at that price point.

    My CTS is actually tighter driving… Kinda funny, the sport seat is exactly the same as my 03-but cloth still takes over “sensa-vinyl”.

    I’d like to drive the GM turbo four for comparison. My HFV6 isn’t quite as sweet as the I-6 in BMW but worlds better than the blown four in the current 3. Caddy, take another shot !!! BMW isn’t moving !!!!

  • avatar
    cimarron typeR

    I’ve owned a 04 330i zhp, g37S 6mt sedan,e36 M, and I thought the ATS 2.0T 6sp was as dynamic as all of those. I didn’t buy it because I was wanting to step away from sedans for a bit.
    At 6ft even, I could sit behind myself actually more comfortably than the g37 because of indented footwell allowed my feet to slip under the front seats better.
    I do wish the 2.0T sounded more refined at revs than the n20, EA series VWs.I wish it made meaningful pull to redline like those other motors.
    Just know a turbo upgrade from Vermont Turbo will easily give 300whp.So theres aftermarket also. This should improve if the Camaro 2.0t gets a following.

  • avatar
    Boomstick0

    I had one of these as a dealership loaner a few years back. A little bit too small for me, but great handling and really fun to drive — but the base engine is a complete joke and not nearly adequate for the car’s excellent handling. No power, 12-13 seconds to 60 etc.


Recent Comments

  • krhodes1: C. Buy them wisely (simplest is best and what isn’t there won’t break), and wrench on them...
  • ToolGuy: If I had this assignment, and I don’t, I would consider releasing the pressure into a closed vessel...
  • R Henry: Anyway….back to the studio…..
  • tomLU86: Question for Redapple–and commentariat, please. I thought BP and Mobil gasoline does not have ethanol....
  • APaGttH: I doubt this will go far. This is the key problem with the Mulroney sticker and EPA MPG numbers on turbo...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Contributors

  • Timothy Cain, Canada
  • Matthew Guy, Canada
  • Ronnie Schreiber, United States
  • Bozi Tatarevic, United States
  • Chris Tonn, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States
  • Mark Baruth, United States
  • Moderators

  • Adam Tonge, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States