By on October 9, 2019

For its last model year, the Cadillac ATS boasted rear-wheel drive, a turbocharged 2.0-liter four-cylinder, and an MSRP of $35,495 plus destination. Two years later, the newest and smallest addition to the Cadillac range keeps the recipe more or less the same, only the starting price of the 2020 CT4 rings in a couple grand lower.

Less power, less price, but perhaps more buyers?

That’s what Cadillac would like to see, though the saga of the old ATS and CTS was not an especially happy one. Despite ballsy V-badged models boasting Dodge-worthy horsepower figures, the brand’s lesser sedans faced an uphill battle. Declining passenger car sales, poor residual values, and the ever-present menace of the Germans made for a bumpy ride.

It hasn’t exactly been smooth sailing for the just-revealed CT4 and CT5, either. Comments about questionable styling choices and less-than-fearsome engine offerings greeted Cadillac’s new crop of four-doors, but that’s Cadillac’s problem. Other performance shoes could drop.

For bottom-rung CT4 Luxury buyers, expect a 2.0L turbo four generating 237 hp and 258 lb-ft and an MSRP of $33,990 after destination. Your only transmission choice is an eight-speed automatic. This places the entry-level RWD Caddy well below the $35k barrier, making it more than $7,000 less expensive than the cheapest BMW 3 Series or Mercedes-Benz C-Class. Adding all-wheel drive to the base CT4 pushes the model’s price to $36,590.

Opting for the Premium Luxury trim adds cost, as well as a four-cylinder most closely associated with a large truck. General Motors’ new-for-2019 2.7-liter turbo four (GM press materials avoid listing the cylinder count) makes 309 hp and 348 lb-ft, inflating the CT4’s starting price to $38,490. Swap RWD for all-wheel motivation, and you’re looking at a price tag of $41,690. The only tranny offered with the 2.7-liter is a 10-speed automatic.

While the Sport model doesn’t add any ponies, it does don an appearance package and Brembo brakes, pushing the price a tick higher ($39,590 with RWD, $41,190 with AWD). Note that ticking the AWD box nets buyers a cold weather package featuring heated front seats (ventilated on Premium Luxury) and a heated steering wheel.

If memories of the defunct ATS-V linger, buyers enamored with moar powah can opt for the CT4-V, a sedan that retains the 2.7-liter but bumps things up a bit. That variant makes 325 hp and 380 lb-ft, still significantly less than Cadillac’s former hot compact. Starting price for the CT4-V is $45,490; for this tab you’ll find Brembo brakes with four-piston front calipers, a limited-slip differential, and 18-inch wheels shod in summer rubber. Adding AWD to the mix takes things to $46,590.

If any of this appeals to you, you’ll get a crack at the CT4 when it arrives early next year.

[Images: Cadillac]

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

63 Comments on “2020 Cadillac CT4 Pricing Revealed; Base Sticker Undercuts Old ATS...”


  • avatar
    notapreppie

    Wow… The CT4-V offers 4% more power and 9% more torque for $7k. I’m sure that will sell like hotcakes.

  • avatar
    thegamper

    I know the product development for these began years ago, it is just hard to imagine a worse market to introduce these two new Cadillac Sedans. Much more established brands in the luxury sedan market are having difficulty moving them. Leases on these will be absolutely horrible to begin with 36k mile leases probably having a residual below 50% where most buyers are probably used to leasing vs buying. GM will have to put cash on the hood almost immediately. The CT4 and CT5 will most certainly put up poor sales numbers. I predict sales in the dozens.

    • 0 avatar
      PSX 5k Ultra Platinum Triple Black

      + the rear end is uglier

      + a gigantic GM 4 cylinder engine is the upgrade instead of a v6 or v8

      At least the gauge cluster doesn’t look like a 90-94 Saturn gauge cluster, but that’s the only upgrade over the ATS.

    • 0 avatar
      SSJeep

      Agreed. No one is moving sedans like they used to. The price point and features on the new CT4 are very good. Time will tell if it is reliable or not… But this should have been done as a smaller crossover or raised hatchback.

  • avatar
    Nick_515

    What do we know about this 2.0T, besides the fact that it’s been detuned from its earlier iteration?

  • avatar
    jack4x

    At first glance that base price is pretty impressive, until one realizes that a G70 starts at $34,900.

    • 0 avatar
      conundrum

      It’s been out for a while now on some Cadillac crossover or other. Different engine entirely from the old 2.0t which had a square 86×86 mm bore and stroke. The new one LSY is a long stroke design, 83×92 mm, because that’s more thermally efficient and it’s also somehow supposed to be less vibratory than the old one. It’s GM’s version of the pussycat Lexus NX 2.0t. Less power, supposedly smoother, better mileage.

      GM made superior blocks, either sand cast or loast foam, for the old 2.0t engines. Don’t know, but wonder whether this new one is just a die-cast cheapie like everyone else makes. Anyone?

  • avatar
    NeilM

    For those who might think 2.7 liters makes for a rather large four cylinder engine, remember that Porsche used to use a 3 liter four in the 944/968.

    But that was back in normally aspirated days. Today a 2 liter turbo four can readily exceed 300 hp and 300 torques while retaining excellent drivability.

    • 0 avatar
      ToddAtlasF1

      2.7 liters does make a rather large four cylinder passenger car engine. GM also has an unparalleled track record of making four cylinder engines with abhorrent levels of NVH.

      • 0 avatar
        TR4

        The Ford Model A was 3.3 liters. No balance shafts. It sold well.

        • 0 avatar
          ToddAtlasF1

          The Ford Model A’s peak output of 40 horsepower was achieved at 2,200 RPM. This truck engine may not sound like it is shaking itself to pieces at 2,200 RPM. The Model A allowed Plymouth and Chevrolet to take market share with ‘Floating Power’ engine mounts and the Stovebolt six. Engine smoothness relative to the Ford Model A was a selling feature. You might as well go back another twenty-five years and say that EVs are good because they were better than ICE cars as recently as 1905.

    • 0 avatar
      ttacgreg

      Yup. and I recall reading that Porsche tried to engineer balance shafts in a way to bypass Mitsubishi patents. They finally gave up and just paid the royalties to Mitsu.
      In all the 2.7 motor’s write ups I have not seen mention of it having any balance shafts.

      • 0 avatar
        Featherston

        @ ttacgreg – C’mon, it took me literally less than 30 seconds to determine the 2.7 has balance shafts: http://www.sae.org/news/2018/05/gm-2.7-l-i-4-revealed

    • 0 avatar
      Hummer

      They must have destroked the 2.9L Colorado 4 cylinder.

    • 0 avatar
      FreedMike

      For what it’s worth, everything I’ve read about the 2.7 four indicates it’s quite refined. Not that it’s gonna change anyone’s mind, but there it is.

      Maybe we should wait until someone drives one to pass judgment?

      • 0 avatar
        scott25

        It refined by GM standards but not by the standards of its competition or stablemates. It sounds absolutely terrible with the windows down or from outside the truck as well. From inside it doesn’t sound much different than the smaller Ford ecoboost, but doesn’t feel as peppy as that does.

        To me it feels like a diesel. I haven’t driven the actual diesel yet though, we haven’t gotten any at the dealer yet

    • 0 avatar
      Daniel J

      Not sure how .2 liters matters. The 2.5T in my Mazda is quite smooth. I found it more smooth at highway cruising than I did many of the competitors 2.0T.

  • avatar
    Hummer

    Lol @ 35k 4 cylinder Cadillac. No thanks. The market for wannabe German sedans has to be slim, why they couldn’t put a decent powertrain in this car is a mystery.

    • 0 avatar
      ToddAtlasF1

      I could see paying at least $35K for the right naturally aspirated four cylinder car. I can’t see it being made by GM. They’ve built some excellent V8s, and some decent V6s. They should play to their strengths.

    • 0 avatar
      ajla

      “why they couldn’t put a decent powertrain in this car is a mystery.”

      I don’t get it either. Just offer the 6.2L in the CT4-V. This isn’t even wannabe German, it is wannabe Volvo.

      • 0 avatar
        jack4x

        I can’t comprehend the argument against doing that, for the same reason I couldn’t in the ATS-V.

        -Is a TT V6 somehow more exclusive or premium? I doubt it, how many V8s available in this class anymore?

        -Is it a displacement tax thing? Anyone who is willing to pay for a 450 hp car in a country that taxes displacement can afford the tax.

        -Is it to protect the Camaro? If so, why? Totally different buyer.

        -Is the NVH of the LT1 too much for the luxury buyer? Have anyone who says that drive an M2. Better yet ask why other luxury brands fake the sounds of a V8 in their lesser cars, then why you can’t offer them the real thing.

        If Cadillac is supposed to be the best GM can offer, then not offering GM’s best engine in their cars is asinine.

        • 0 avatar
          ttiguy

          Clearly you have not spent actual seat time behind the wheel of both and are just a “bench racer”. I’ve spent considerable time in both and without a doubt the two cars possess a very distinct / unique character separating them. It would make little sense to make them MORE SIMILAR. If you actually think that any performance car MUST HAVE a V8 then you are clearly ignorant.

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            Sorry didn’t get the memo that Cadillac was no longer a luxury division but instead a performance division now. That further justifies my belief that Cadillac moved downmarket since Chevrolet was supposedly their performance division and it has better engine selection.

            4 cylinders are perfectly adequate performance engines, in non luxury Miata sized vehicles. Not in a Cadillac that is using one of the weakest engines in its parent companies portfolio of engines.

          • 0 avatar
            ToddAtlasF1

            “If you actually think that any performance car MUST HAVE a V8 then you are clearly ignorant.”

            Perhaps, but nowhere near as ignorant as anyone who thinks that the market needs a four cylinder Cadillac.

          • 0 avatar
            jack4x

            Please spare me the assumptions about what I have and haven’t driven.

            I never said any performance car must have a V8. But I doubt Cadillac would lose any sales if they put the LT1 in the CT4 (or the ATS). Hell the might even gain a few from people like me. Who is the guy out there going “I must have a turbo 6”? That person wants a BMW anyway. All the excuses I’ve heard and laid out above, ring hollow to me.

            Put your flagship engine in your flagship brand cars.

    • 0 avatar
      Hummer

      I’m going to go on record saying I don’t mind the styling, but I know damn well the 6.2L fits as seen on the Camaro. Like hell im going to be stuck with a 2.7L 4 cylinder, leave that for the economy cars.

      I’d feel like a dumbarae buying a $35k platform with a crap engine when I can buy that same platform for $35k with a 6.2L.

      Cadillac seems to have moved downmarket, below Chevrolet with this move.

      • 0 avatar
        Daniel J

        For another data point, the IS300 has a higher starting price with just a turbo 4 pot. The IS350 does come with their 3.5L v6, which is the same as the Camry I’m guessing, and doesn’t produce any torque unti the engine is wound up.

        Who knows, maybe the 2.7T is ok?

        • 0 avatar
          N8iveVA

          Cadillac is targeting the BMW 3 Series with this and that starts at $6,300 more also with a 2.0t. I don’t understand why people aren’t understanding that.

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            Cadillac has tried chasing the Germans with discount German-esque cars, it has repeatedly failed. German buyers want German cars. What Cadillac has not done and is most famous for, is selling American vehicles, maybe they should try selling actual Americanized drivetrains. At $35k this should have the 3.6l and at the $45k this should have a 6.2L. I don’t understand why people aren’t understanding this.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            GM and Ford have similar problems with their near luxury divisions and both continue to live in denial about them. Neither is a luxury marque, neither at this point is actually prestigious, and more so for Cadillac, both have a dedicated distribution chain for their products and in Cadillac’s case was 933 dealers as of 2017. In order to find success, both brands must offer more value than their competitors.

            Per the article Cadillac is pricing the CT4 about 7K less than BMW with similar drivetrain configuration, which drops to roughly $5500 when AWD is added. Maybe that is their way of finally accepting the position they are in and attempting to offer value? Maybe they crunched the numbers and determined with previous ATS incentives they were selling them for 7K less than 3 Series ATP and why not just start there and not do incentives? I’m not sure. What I would personally do is use economies of scale to offer a better product as you describe, but charge roughly the same as my competition to make the more for your money argument. Maybe the cheaper to start argument makes more sense? We’ll see.

            I would also point out Alpha was never intended for larger motors and was modified to accommodate the LS and V6 motors. Perhaps with this iteration they are sticking to the platform’s strengths?

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            So basically Cadillac has a compromised platform that cannot accept normal sized drivetrains without substantial engineering? I’m going to take that to mean the platform isn’t capable of supporting the power output of normal sized engines since the LT family of engines is pretty well known to stick into the same holes as DOHC 4 cylinders quite well.

            I’ll be impressed if GM can take a compromised platform with a astoundingly bad set of engine options and make it successful, have they even fixed the rear seat leg room issue? The Camaro seat is comfortable for me pushed all the way back until it’s touching the rear seat.

            At the end of the day it’s impossible not to laugh at Cadillac selling a 4 cylinder car for $35,000USD (not Monopoly money). I cannot get over how arrogant that is to actually ask those prices for a 4 cylinder car.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            From what I understand, yes. Their entry level products were simply not intended for proper drivetrains, which is in part an engineering problem but also in part a management problem.

            I don’t recall now but I thought the ATS-V was Alpha and the dropped an LS motor in like the previous CTS-V, but maybe that was some sort of oddball V6 configuration.

            I agree with you, but the entire segment has taken a big step down and done the same thing. Dark days for entry level near luxury.

          • 0 avatar
            ToddAtlasF1

            “I agree with you, but the entire segment has taken a big step down and done the same thing. Dark days for entry level near luxury.”

            This is what was once known as an opportunity. When everyone else is selling nasty compliance cars, someone selling comparable product with mechanical components that are actually premium would have a competitive advantage. It is terrifying that there are people in decision making positions who don’t take advantage of this fact.

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            “ This is what was once known as an opportunity. When everyone else is selling nasty compliance cars, someone selling comparable product with mechanical components that are actually premium would have a competitive advantage. It is terrifying that there are people in decision making positions who don’t take advantage of this fact.”

            This, hang this on the wall and give Todd a trophy, this is exactly what I’m getting at, Cadillac execs are some of the least intelligent corporate execs I can think of. They have a product that is missing one main important component to make it near perfect. Instead of embracing this opportunity they go in the complete opposite direction.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            I agree with you both completely, but its “me’h, good enough” from the leadership. No pride in their work and it shows.

    • 0 avatar
      Daniel J

      I could see the 6.2 in the CT5. I’d take a 4 pot turbo any day over the 3.6.

      I just don’t see anything wrong with engine choices when looking at the competition.

      And 35K for a 4 cylinder car? Gee, Accords, Stingers, and many other cars more than 35K *only* come with 4 pots.

      • 0 avatar
        jack4x

        The Stinger is available with a V6.

        And simply being up to the level of the competition has been an abject failure for Cadillac thus far. They possess a corporate asset that literally none of the competition does, a world class V8 engine with incredible economies of scale from its use in trucks and sports cars. Perhaps they should “dare greatly” and install it in their premium line of cars.

      • 0 avatar
        ajla

        The CT4-V isn’t a $35K car and it still has a 4-cylinder.

  • avatar
    ajla

    I put my odds of purchase at 0%.

  • avatar
    dukeisduke

    Wow, “questionable styling choices” is right. The lines on the rear end are just plain weird, including the trunklid that looks like it overlaps the rear fascia.

    The interior is unappealing, too, with the front door storage bins that appear to intrude into the footwells, and a steering wheel that looks it came out of a first-gen Chevy Cruze.

    • 0 avatar
      ToddAtlasF1

      That decklid has got Chris Bangle written all over it.

    • 0 avatar
      N8iveVA

      I’m ok with the steering wheel but it needs some brighter trim on it. And that door bin on the passenger side does look odd in the pic, but the driver’s side seems ok. Yeah what’s up with the rear? I’m ok with the trunk lid but the way the center goes in below it where the license plate goes looks really strange.

  • avatar
    readallover

    If it has the same (non-existent) back seat legroom as the ATS, it will go nowhere.

  • avatar
    FreedMike

    Actually, I’m going to be the devil’s advocate and say that this actually a step in the right direction – if they can’t really compete with Ze Germans on product, then a value play is the right one to make.

    Not that I have much confidence that this will work out – the segment’s shrinking, and much like we’ve seen in the midsize and compact sedan segments, the winners will be the core players. In this class, that means the 3-series, Lexus IS, A4 and A/C-class will survive for sure, and the more marginal players – this one, the Jag XE, and Acura’s whatever-they-call-it -are probably goners long term. The Kia Stinger’s probably not a long term bet either, which is a damn shame – it doesn’t really fit into their lineup.

    Jury’s out on the Alfa Giulia, Genesis G70, and A3.

    But, hey, give Caddy credit for trying. We’ll see how it goes. At minimum, it’s probably a decent driver, and it’s *not* another blobby CUV, which is where the brand’s clearly going.

  • avatar
    Davekaybsc

    Hey at least the ’90s Pontiac gauge cluster is gone. This one still looks 10 years out of date compared to what’s in the 3, A4, and C-class, but it’s at least not worse than what Infiniti, Acura, and Lexus have.

  • avatar
    scott25

    I really don’t get why they still have to have two similarly sized sedans, especially if they’re ditching the CT6. Especially with the 4 cylinder bonanza under the hood. People who want (or will settle for) a “premium” brand vehicle with a four cylinder are generally not buying sedans.

    • 0 avatar
      Hummer

      “ a “premium” brand vehicle with a four cylinder are generally not buying sedans.”

      This the consumers that don’t care about engine size at this point are highly likely not to be car enthusiasts, these people have all moved to crossovers as that’s the fad. Anyone still shopping a Cadillac sedan is going to notice that this car has two engine options that are better suited in a Miata. They will also notice the CTS-V they hear about when Cadillac is mentioned as an honest to goodness wearer of the badge, is no longer on the lot.

  • avatar
    DeadWeight

    Guangzhou-Guadalajara (GM) which owns Cadillac, and Cadillac, which shares approx 95% of parts with other vehicles made by Guangzhou-Guadalajara (GM), comes out with this POS to replace the POS ATS, and is expecting different results with it than with the ATS?

    Definition of insanity..

  • avatar

    First they have to show some respect to customers they already have.

  • avatar
    Daniel J

    The real question is, why would anyone buy this over a Stinger or Genesis G70? We can talk about the Germans and Lexus all we want, but value wise, I’d stick with the Koreans.

    • 0 avatar
      Robotdawn

      The Stinger is the size of a bus? I like the G70’s looks, the Stinger looks massive. If they are platform mates, then the styling on the Stinger makes it seem distinctly larger than the G70 and CT4/ATS.
      I don’t get any of the complaints on the powertrain being a 2.0T. I’m pretty sure the base BMW 3 and Mercedes C Class are the same. Plus the Caddy is 5k cheaper and I wouldn’t have to spend extra for “luxuries” like bluetooth and Android Auto like you probably still have to on those makes.
      Lexus IS just recently added a 2.0T, before it just had the 2.5 V6 which is absurd and the Camry V6.
      Not sure why anyone is complaining when Cadillac is just doing what everyone else is doing.

      • 0 avatar
        ajla

        Not many are complaining that the base engine is a 2.0T. They are complaining that the 2.0T is the weakest in class and that the “V” engine is a 2.7T 4-cylinder.

        • 0 avatar
          PrincipalDan

          @ajla – +1

          2.0 + turbo = 250 hp minimum if you want me give it a 2nd look (oh and less than 4000 weight)

          Torque should be close to 300 lb ft.

          Otherwise you aren’t really trying in your engineering department.

          • 0 avatar
            ajla

            -Don’t offer both a CT4 and CT5. Pick one and be done with it.
            -Base is 250hp/300tq 2.0T for $35K.
            -V-Sport is 350hp/400tq 3.0T for $45K.
            -V is 6.2L for $55K.
            -300hp hybrid or PHEV version for $45k.

  • avatar
    ToolGuy

    Another styling and engineering triumph! Just one question before I sign:
    – How is the coffee in the dealer service area?

    The ICE world seems determined to off itself. Depressing to watch.

  • avatar
    Robbie

    Caddilac still exists? Why?

  • avatar
    monkeydelmagico

    As long as the dealership experience is sufficiently luxury the ct4 should do ok. While I would still probably buy a loaded Accord this new caddy might get a few takers who would otherwise be driving a Camry.

  • avatar
    ponchoman49

    So what we have here is basically a re-run of the previous model complete with comical rear seat legroom, a glove box sized trunk, uglier rear styling combined with considerably less power than last year’s model, no V6 and another dumb letter name. What could go wrong? Well at least they sort of corrected the instrument cluster and lowered the price so that is something I guess.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • MiataReallyIsTheAnswer: Side view= Fusion Rear view= Civic Front view= Sad fish
  • R Henry: Really? Do we really want to snark at each other here, or do we want to enjoy our hobby here as brothers?...
  • MiataReallyIsTheAnswer: Indeed. I have a newish F150 crew cab 4×4 at work that listed over 50 fat ones and the...
  • jack4x: Guys, I’m well aware of the relationship between power and torque, and that different engines have...
  • thejohnnycanuck: You have to admit the look of that thing sticks out like a sore thumb. And then there’s the...

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