2013 Cadillac ATS 2.5L Review (Car & Driver) - Page 4

  1. Welcome to GM Inside News Forum – General discussion forum for GM

    Welcome to GM Inside News Forum - a website dedicated to all things GM.

    You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, at no cost, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, Join GM Inside News Forum today!
     
+ Reply to Thread
Page 4 of 11 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 154

Thread: 2013 Cadillac ATS 2.5L Review (Car & Driver)

  1. #46
    6.2 Liter LS9 Supercharged V8
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    6,235
    Thanks
    7
    Thanked 141 Times in 88 Posts

    Re: 2013 Cadillac ATS 2.5L Review (Car & Driver)

    Quote Originally Posted by ral1960 View Post
    Then they would gripe about the rear legroom and small trunk, which oddly never bothered them in the 3 series. Their first drive review says "The big four-cylinder is fairly loud at high revs"--it only recently became a leaf blower. They might be noticing because it's fairly quiet at normal revs.

    People who buy the 2.5 will rev it near the redline once in a blue moon. It irritates me when magazines rate a car by an inappropriate standard. Cadillac engines have often been pretty loud at full throttle--I think it's intentional.

    C&D got 6.3 sec 0-60 for the 2.0T (1.1 less than 7.4)? Didn't other people get under 6, or was that the manual?
    I do believe that some got right at 6 seconds (maybe a hair under), though its important to note that these were early cars (not broken in). In later test I expect the 2.0T to break into the 5 second range easily.

  2. Remove Advertisements
    GM Inside News
    Advertisements
     

  3. #47
    1.8 Liter ECOTEC
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    31
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Re: C&D -- 2013 Cadillac ATS 2.5L - Instrumented Test

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Burns View Post
    I would probably get the 2.5. I'm not a fan of turbos and the 3.6L is too much engine.
    What he said too much engine. I never heard that before. Come on your teasing me how can you possibly have too much engine? Explain please.

  4. #48
    6.0 Liter L76 V8 ral1960's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    2,487
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 8 Times in 6 Posts
    My Ride
    2008 DTS Perf-Plat

    Re: 2013 Cadillac ATS 2.5L Review (Car & Driver)

    Quote Originally Posted by jpd80 View Post
    GM has a wonderful 3.0 V6 there that would work a treat in a light vehicle like the ATS
    and allow Cadillac to offer something in a base model few other manufacturers could match
    something that would set the base ATS apart from the competition and more DESIRABLE to own
    Except that it costs as much to manufacture and weighs about the same as the 3.6 and doesn't get better mpg. Other than that, it would be great in this car. There's a reason it's being phased out and replaced by the 2.0T.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Show-Me View Post
    especially if I could order advanced safety features on the base model.
    Afraid you get half a loaf. The 2.5 Luxury has this as an option:
    Driver Awareness Package, includes Safety Alert Seat, (UEU) Forward Collision Alert, (UFL) Lane Departure Warning, (CE1) Rainsense wipers, and (AYF) rear thorax air bags

    The 2.0 and 3.6 offer this on Performance and Premium:
    Driver Assist Package, includes all (Y65) Driver Awareness Package content plus (KSG) adaptive cruise control, (UGN) automatic collision preparation, (J77) electronic parking brake, (UVZ) Front and Rear Automatic Braking, (UFT) Side Blind Zone Alert, Rear Cross Traffic Alert, and (UV6) full-color Head-Up Display
    http://eogld.ecomm.gm.com/NASApp/dom...=3&addOptions=
    I imagine the safety bits will work their way down in the future.

  5. #49
    6.2 Liter LS9 Supercharged V8
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    6,235
    Thanks
    7
    Thanked 141 Times in 88 Posts

    Re: 2013 Cadillac ATS 2.5L Review (Car & Driver)

    The 3.0 V-6 would do well in a car as light as the ATS, fuel economy gap would grow bigger as torque would be less of an issue.

    However as things stands the 3.0 has a bad rep. now so its going away.

  6. #50
    2.4 Liter SIDI ECOTEC
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    371
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 25 Times in 12 Posts

    Re: C&D -- 2013 Cadillac ATS 2.5L - Instrumented Test

    Quote Originally Posted by mchicha View Post
    Who adjusts volume when reversing a car?
    Apparently no one who drives this car....

  7. #51
    6.0 Liter L76 V8 ral1960's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    2,487
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 8 Times in 6 Posts
    My Ride
    2008 DTS Perf-Plat

    Re: 2013 Cadillac ATS 2.5L Review (Car & Driver)

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Show-Me View Post
    I think a better combo with be the 2.5 with eAssist, picking up some 15 horsepower with better fuel economy in city and highway driving. I think the eAssist weighs about 65 pounds, so that weight gain would be worth it.
    If they had put a couple inches more tail on the car, there would be room for batteries and still have a usable trunk, but not as it is. Maybe they'll do it for Chevy or Buick derivatives or the ATS wagon/CUV. I sure hope Alpha was designed to support eAssist, but it might not be.

    They've spent a lot of money developing hybrid drivetrains that don't sell or spread to many models. Eassist seems like the best of them, yet it's only on one engine still.

    I think they've discovered enough wiggle room and fudge factors in the new CAFE calculations that hybrids just aren't a priority--if they can sell more Voltec cars.

  8. #52
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Dallas Texas area
    Posts
    1,846
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
    My Ride
    '13 F150, '09 G37, '10 R6

    Re: 2013 Cadillac ATS 2.5L Review (Car & Driver)

    Quote Originally Posted by b4z View Post
    Why can't GM build a smoother non coarse feeling/sounding 4 banger?
    It is a good question. If they ever do, they should put it in the Malibu!

  9. #53
    6.0 Liter L76 V8 ral1960's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    2,487
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 8 Times in 6 Posts
    My Ride
    2008 DTS Perf-Plat

    Re: 2013 Cadillac ATS 2.5L Review (Car & Driver)

    Quote Originally Posted by 63GrandSport001 View Post
    The 3.0 V-6 would do well in a car as light as the ATS, fuel economy gap would grow bigger as torque would be less of an issue.

    However as things stands the 3.0 has a bad rep. now so its going away.
    costs as much to manufacture as 3.6
    less low end torque than the 2.0T
    Is it significantly smoother than the 2.5 in normal driving--not maniacal journalist driving?
    Haven't driven either, but I doubt it.

    Best use for the 3.0: half a 6.0 V12

    I'm beginning to think the reverse/volume issue could be the Safety Nanny at work. GM didn't fire all their liability lawyers during Bankruptcy.
    I wonder if they tried the steering wheel buttons or voice control while reversing or just the center stack buttons.

    Has anyone heard why the Performance models have a fixed rear seat? Luxury and Premium have split folding. I don't get it.
    Last edited by ral1960; 01-25-2013 at 11:08 PM.

  10. #54
    GMI Camaro Forum Moderator Premium Member Z284ever's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Chicagoland
    Posts
    7,355
    Thanks
    136
    Thanked 747 Times in 383 Posts

    Re: 2013 Cadillac ATS 2.5L Review (Car & Driver)

    Quote Originally Posted by ral1960 View Post
    Then they would gripe about the rear legroom and small trunk, which oddly never bothered them in the 3 series. Their first drive review says "The big four-cylinder is fairly loud at high revs"--it only recently became a leaf blower. They might be noticing because it's fairly quiet at normal revs.

    People who buy the 2.5 will rev it near the redline once in a blue moon. It irritates me when magazines rate a car by an inappropriate standard. Cadillac engines have often been pretty loud at full throttle--I think it's intentional.

    C&D got 6.3 sec 0-60 for the 2.0T (1.1 less than 7.4)? Didn't other people get under 6, or was that the manual?
    Seems to me that they liked the ATS........A-LOT! So they thought that the base engine wasn't up to being a match for the remarkable chassis. So what?
    By the way - smooth, lusty, eager engines make you want to kiss the rev limiter every day. It's one of those things that make people fall in love with their cars.
    Pony Car: an affordable, compact, highly styled car with a sporty or performance-oriented image and an available V8.

  11. #55
    6.2 Liter LS9 Supercharged V8 VS Ute 5Litre's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Wagga NSW
    Posts
    8,617
    Thanks
    104
    Thanked 333 Times in 215 Posts
    My Ride
    2008 SX Holden Captiva Diesel

    Re: C&D -- 2013 Cadillac ATS 2.5L - Instrumented Test

    Quote Originally Posted by the_smurf2008 View Post
    It's on the steering wheel, right there in the interior photo. Next to the phone button.
    Also only a moron changes volumn in reverse while moving.


    Why wouldnt they be able to though?

    It's stupid just leave a normal knob there steering whel controls are never in the same place as your hands
    She’s got four a colour, four a clear
    She’s lookin’ better year by year
    And unlike you tonight she’s riding low

    So baby its goodbye
    You could never get me high
    Like when I light the nitro on my
    HQ454 Monroe

  12. #56
    GMI Staff Member Premium Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    11,584
    Thanks
    4
    Thanked 101 Times in 53 Posts

    Re: C&D -- 2013 Cadillac ATS 2.5L - Instrumented Test

    Quote Originally Posted by hvac1000 View Post
    What he said too much engine. I never heard that before. Come on your teasing me how can you possibly have too much engine? Explain please.
    Well in the real world there are very few instances where you can take advantage of such an engine's power, whereas the fuel economy tradeoffs are a disadvantage almost all the time. Then of course there is the added cost during purchase.

  13. #57
    Walking
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    13
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Re: 2013 Cadillac ATS 2.5L Review (Car & Driver)

    Quote Originally Posted by ral1960 View Post
    costs as much to manufacture as 3.6
    less low end torque than the 2.0T
    Is it significantly smoother than the 2.5 in normal driving--not maniacal journalist driving?
    Haven't driven either, but I doubt it.

    Best use for the 3.0: half a 6.0 V12

    I'm beginning to think the reverse/volume issue could be the Safety Nanny at work. GM didn't fire all their liability lawyers during Bankruptcy.
    I wonder if they tried the steering wheel buttons or voice control while reversing or just the center stack buttons.

    Has anyone heard why the Performance models have a fixed rear seat? Luxury and Premium have split folding. I don't get it.
    Split folding seats require the change to have the part bend the rear seats reminded taking away rigidity from the rear suspension. then ones with a pass through, usually have a x brace for added rigidity.

  14. #58
    4.6 Liter Northstar V8 roy219's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Chicago, Illinois
    Posts
    1,784
    Thanks
    843
    Thanked 346 Times in 223 Posts
    My Ride
    CTA trains and buses

    Re: 2013 Cadillac ATS 2.5L Review (Car & Driver)

    Quote Originally Posted by ral1960 View Post
    Then they would gripe about the rear legroom and small trunk, which oddly never bothered them in the 3 series.
    ATS' exiguous rear seat and trunk room may elicit mild complaints, but I doubt those gripes would be all that significant. Compact sport sedans as a group prioritize sporty driving dynamics above interior roominess, something Kolman did adumbrate in his review.

    Also, the F30 3-Series is among the best in its segment for rear seat room and trunk space, so that's probably why those attributes never bothered reviewers.

    Quote Originally Posted by ral1960 View Post
    Their first drive review says "The big four-cylinder is fairly loud at high revs"--it only recently became a leaf blower. They might be noticing because it's fairly quiet at normal revs.
    I don't know if this is the case for 2.5L ATS models, but the 2.0L turbo 6MT version my brother and I test drove exhibited a mild low frequency groan in the 1800 - 2500 rpm range. It was definitely noticeable, but not too annoying.
    My modes of transportation: CTA 'L' & buses, Metra, Pace bus, rental cars (usually GM), taxicabs, bicycling, and walking.
    Member of the "I will never purchase a new car" club.
    Get the facts about ethanol and biofuels in the USA!

  15. #59
    Firebird Concept (the turbine one)
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Dearborn, MI
    Posts
    14,995
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
    My Ride
    FORD

    Re: 2013 Cadillac ATS 2.5L Review (Car & Driver)

    Quote Originally Posted by 63GrandSport001 View Post
    My only beef with the ATS is that Cadillac doesn't offer a manual transmission in both the 2.5L and 3.6L engines.

    They are being silly, they are acting as if the only player in this class is the BMW 328i.

    IS250: 204/185
    G25 sedan: 218/187
    C250 sedan: 201/229
    ATS 2.5: 202/190

    So you see the 2.5 ATS is in line with the other cars in its class in base form, also BMW is suppose to get an engine under the 328i. In base trim (no options) the ATS 2.5L is 3,315 pounds which gives it a good power to weight ratio compared to other base cars in its class. ATS 2.5 is 16.4 pounds per horsepower, the IS250 is 16.8 pounds per horsepower, and the G25 is 16.3 pounds per horsepower. As you can see it has the power to weight ratio, I just think that an optional manual transmission would do wonders for the 2.5L I-4 engine.
    Perhaps this article was written before BMW announced the 320i which also will not be utterly divergent from the ATS 2.5 for output? You also forgot about the Audi A4 which has a TOP engine offering of a 211 hp 258 lb ft 2.0TFSI, and the Acura TSX with a 201 hp / 170 lb ft inline 4 cylinder base engine as well.

    Quote Originally Posted by 63GrandSport001 View Post
    The 3.0 V-6 would do well in a car as light as the ATS, fuel economy gap would grow bigger as torque would be less of an issue.

    However as things stands the 3.0 has a bad rep. now so its going away.
    Realistically to expect a 270 hp as the base engine in this class is at best a bit divergent from what should be expected. Also if anything the LF1 would have been placed in the lineup where the 2.0T is today. Perhaps the LF1 is one of the most under appreciated base engines available , and the scrutiny of the engine is mainly due to its placement in relatively heavy vehicles it seems.

    Quote Originally Posted by ral1960 View Post
    costs as much to manufacture as 3.6
    less low end torque than the 2.0T
    Is it significantly smoother than the 2.5 in normal driving--not maniacal journalist driving?
    Haven't driven either, but I doubt it.

    Best use for the 3.0: half a 6.0 V12

    I'm beginning to think the reverse/volume issue could be the Safety Nanny at work. GM didn't fire all their liability lawyers during Bankruptcy.
    I wonder if they tried the steering wheel buttons or voice control while reversing or just the center stack buttons.

    Has anyone heard why the Performance models have a fixed rear seat? Luxury and Premium have split folding. I don't get it.
    Perhaps there happens to be cross car bracing between the rear shock towers?

    Quote Originally Posted by Z284ever View Post
    Seems to me that they liked the ATS........A-LOT! So they thought that the base engine wasn't up to being a match for the remarkable chassis. So what?
    By the way - smooth, lusty, eager engines make you want to kiss the rev limiter every day. It's one of those things that make people fall in love with their cars.
    Personally all of my engines see high engine speeds even the ones that are not as aurally pleasing at high rpm.

  16. #60
    6.2 Liter LS3 V8
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    The Great White North
    Posts
    3,549
    Thanks
    367
    Thanked 243 Times in 139 Posts

    Re: 2013 Cadillac ATS 2.5L Review (Car & Driver)

    Quote Originally Posted by ral1960 View Post
    People who buy the 2.5 will rev it near the redline once in a blue moon. It irritates me when magazines rate a car by an inappropriate standard. Cadillac engines have often been pretty loud at full throttle--I think it's intentional.

    C&D got 6.3 sec 0-60 for the 2.0T (1.1 less than 7.4)? Didn't other people get under 6, or was that the manual?
    Perhaps, but the ATS is a sports sedan. And part of the fun in a lower powered sport sedan is you can actually use a lot of their capabilities on normal roads -- try that with a ZL1 Camaro ("Hello, officer!"). From various reviews, it doesn't necessarily have to be quieter so much as have a more pleasing quality to the sound of when working hard. They've nailed the hard part -- the chassis balance, the braking. The fours just need a bit more polish and the ATS will be the clear class leader. THAT'S quite an accomplishment if Caddy's willing to keep its nose to the grindstone.

  17. Remove Advertisements
    GM Inside News
    Advertisements
     

Quick Reply Quick Reply

Register Now

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v4.1.2