Cadillac CT5

[c1pher]

I love it but couldn’t buy one with that rear side window

[Dog Face Pony Soldier]

😇

[David70]

As an ATS owner I am interested but not sure I am crazy about the look. I really think the smaller CT4 might be better for me if it keeps RWD.

[mkoesel]

https://www.autoblog.com/2019/04/18/...hief-engineer/

The answers to the questions at the end may be of particular interest to some enthusiasts.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by mkoesel

https://www.autoblog.com/2019/04/18/...hief-engineer/

The answers to the questions at the end may be of particular interest to some enthusiasts.

Thanks for posting. As one who is contemplating picking up an ATS now vs. waiting for the CT5, it was good information. It's good to hear Cadillac is sticking to a dynamic chassis architecture vs. going soft like BMW did with the F30.

[Captain Blood]

Originally Posted by glennQNYC

I call it the droop-meister kink. ����*♂️

The super-short front overhang is sexy though.

Reminds me a LOT of a 2008 Infinity G35. Which was a good looking car.

Caddy has always made good looking cars. But the only CTS or CT5 that would interest me would be V model (especially in a wagon).

[David70]

Seems strange to me

3.0 V-6 twin turbo in the CT5 - 335 hp and 400 ft. lb. of torque.
3.0 V-6 twin turbo in the CT6 - 404 hp and 400 ft. lb. of torque

[Germanauto]

This car is more of the same from GM. Just look at the interior, typical GM plastics and switchgear. They always fail to invest in the details. At the Detroit auto show the worst built cars for the price were Cadillacs. Hollow ass doors when you knocked on them. Go to the Genesis or even the Kia K900 examples and they are built to a higher standard.

The only saving grace for the CT5 would be a 3-series price with 5-series levels of space and equipment. But then again, that strategy failed miserably for the CT6 as the likes of the 5-series and E-class were already plenty spacious, priced similarly, and much better engineered and built cars.

With the contracting sedan segment I just don't see anybody buying these. Like the ATS, CTS, and CT6 it's clearly not "bad," but doesn't offer anything compelling whether it be in luxury amenities, lease pricing, reliability, etc.

[RM7]

Originally Posted by Schwarzschild Radius

Reminds me a LOT of a 2008 Infinity G35. Which was a good looking car.

Yes.

Caddy has always made good looking cars.

No.

[RM7]

Originally Posted by Germanauto

This car is more of the same from GM. Just look at the interior, typical GM plastics and switchgear.

I don't know, the interior of the CTS-V was pretty trick, touch-screen that hides a compartment behind it, all sorts of little awesome features. If you want to complain about plastic, I can find a metric mile of it in any BMW, including an M, I think this is just more confirmation bias. The false perception that a BMW interior is CNCed out of a 6x6x6 block of aluminum, inlaid with goat-balls leather and sapphires.

[David70]

Originally Posted by Germanauto

Like the ATS, CTS, and CT6 it's clearly not "bad," but doesn't offer anything compelling whether it be in luxury amenities, lease pricing, reliability, etc.

I bought an ATS partly for the initial price and the long term reliability. From owning many German cars my guess is that owning an ATS at 150k is likely to have a lot less expense than a BMW at 150k miles. Buying GM parts with a pretty simple V-6, transmission, and components.

Then I thought the handling was excellent and the power was acceptable. Size is also fine for me and make the car bigger and the weight and cost to build it goes up and the fun goes down.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by Germanauto

This car is more of the same from GM. Just look at the interior, typical GM plastics and switchgear. They always fail to invest in the details. At the Detroit auto show the worst built cars for the price were Cadillacs. Hollow ass doors when you knocked on them. Go to the Genesis or even the Kia K900 examples and they are built to a higher standard.

The only saving grace for the CT5 would be a 3-series price with 5-series levels of space and equipment. But then again, that strategy failed miserably for the CT6 as the likes of the 5-series and E-class were already plenty spacious, priced similarly, and much better engineered and built cars.

With the contracting sedan segment I just don't see anybody buying these. Like the ATS, CTS, and CT6 it's clearly not "bad," but doesn't offer anything compelling whether it be in luxury amenities, lease pricing, reliability, etc.

You have a bias against GM, you've admitted it's personal family stuff with GM. Cadillac came into the luxury sport sedan market with the CTS, then followed with the ATS. As drivers cars, both have been rated as good or better than recent BMW products. Magazines nit pick over stupid shit like how fancy the gauges look or how small the windows are, and operation of CUE. Initial assembly quality is on par with the Germans, ultra longevity a BMW can provide, may be a different story; but not many leasers care about that.

[Captain Blood]

Originally Posted by David70

I bought an ATS partly for the initial price and the long term reliability. From owning many German cars my guess is that owning an ATS at 150k is likely to have a lot less expense than a BMW at 150k miles. Buying GM parts with a pretty simple V-6, transmission, and components.

Then I thought the handling was excellent and the power was acceptable. Size is also fine for me and make the car bigger and the weight and cost to build it goes up and the fun goes down.

Caddy? My SRX was more expensive to keep up than the Bimmer.

[Germanauto]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

You have a bias against GM, you've admitted it's personal family stuff with GM. Cadillac came into the luxury sport sedan market with the CTS, then followed with the ATS. As drivers cars, both have been rated as good or better than recent BMW products. Magazines nit pick over stupid shit like how fancy the gauges look or how small the windows are, and operation of CUE. Initial assembly quality is on par with the Germans, ultra longevity a BMW can provide, may be a different story; but not many leasers care about that.

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"

[Germanauto]

Originally Posted by JamesNoBrakes

I don't know, the interior of the CTS-V was pretty trick, touch-screen that hides a compartment behind it, all sorts of little awesome features. If you want to complain about plastic, I can find a metric mile of it in any BMW, including an M, I think this is just more confirmation bias. The false perception that a BMW interior is CNCed out of a 6x6x6 block of aluminum, inlaid with goat-balls leather and sapphires.

Not confirmation bias at all. Anybody objective would see that a BMW's interior is built to a much higher standard than a Cadillac's, it's not even close.

You act like I'm the only one who's ever said that.

[cfm56d7b]

Any details about CT5 suspension? Magnetic ride control?

[David70]

Originally Posted by Schwarzschild Radius

Caddy? My SRX was more expensive to keep up than the Bimmer.

I have to go with averages and not ask everyone if there has ever been a Cadillac that cost more than a BMW to repair and maintain. Yes some individual BMW's have been less costly and than other individual Cadillac's.

[Efthreeoh]

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.

[Dogeeseegod]

I have no taste for the newer designs of cars. Everything looks like angry Japanese fish to me now.

[David70]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

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.

X2.

One reason you have to read reviews and just not read the final rankings.
Then see what the cars actually cost compared to the MSRP (I only care what they really cost). If they are knocking things you don't care about then your results can be different. The car with the biggest trunk and rear seat will win this area of the ratings, if you prefer a smaller car this might be opposite to how you feel.

If comparing the brands the ATS trunk is smaller, the rear seat is smaller, gauges aren't as good, I disagree that CUE is a big deal, dealership isn't as nice as Audi. All depends on what is most important to you. None of these were in my top 5 of things I wanted.

[SteveinArizona]

Originally Posted by David70

X2.

One reason you have to read reviews and just not read the final rankings.
Then see what the cars actually cost compared to the MSRP (I only care what they really cost). If they are knocking things you don't care about then your results can be different. The car with the biggest trunk and rear seat will win this area of the ratings, if you prefer a smaller car this might be opposite to how you feel.

If comparing the brands the ATS trunk is smaller, the rear seat is smaller, gauges aren't as good, I disagree that CUE is a big deal, dealership isn't as nice as Audi. All depends on what is most important to you. None of these were in my top 5 of things I wanted.

+1. I read reviews where the magazine compares a $250K car with an $80K car and comes out with a single conclusion (duh...the more expensive car wins). A lot of people at these forums knock Consumer Reports ratings but if one unpacks the ratings, they are more useful than most enthusiast magazine ratings. If driving handling and performance is most important to you, look for a rating based on that feature; if safety is most important, look for that feature; or combine those features that are most important to you.

As a society I think we have moved to looking for a simple solution for everything.

In my case, Cadillac didn't offer a car that met my needs (performance, luxury, qualifying phev, not a huge car). But if it did, I would certainly have looked at it.