Quote:
Originally Posted by Germanauto
Journalists didn't nitpick those cars at all, they did quite the opposite and glanced over all their flaws thanks to their pro-Detroit bias. Then nobody bought them and they were left scratching their heads.
The Cadillac crop of sedans were not bad but offered zero reason to be purchased over the competition. Two of them are being sent to the graveyard for a reason.
"Initial assembly on par with the Germans"  |
The initial rollout of the ATS was applauded by the automotive press for ride and handling.
It won most ride and handling contests against the German competitors even at the M3/ATS-V level. But he press always complained about trunk size, rear seat size and access, along with engine sound. The "materials" used in the interior were not "well matched". The CUE was designed by the Devil himself. The last articles I read delved into how "smallish the windows are" and the gauges we're not even fit for a Chevy Cruise.
I've spent a lot of time in the ATS, all that shit is nit picking at worst and annoying at best. I liked the interior layout, seating position, and the CUE was no more distracting than any other purposeless interface. OMG it gets FINGERPRINTS on it, yeah, so does my cell phone, BFD. I think Cadillac's only real mistake was not offering a manual transmission with the V6.
I say initial assembly quality as it pertains to how well the car holds up over time. I have a lot of experience with BMW, and only one example with a GM product. I found the Cadillac as nicely assembled as a BMW. In fact, the layout of the underhood topography is a level better than an F30. The Cadillac under the hood was logical and organized as compared to a BMW F30. How well the ATS holds up over time is yet to be answered.