Add a manual transmission to this model, and then call me for my credit card deposit information.




.

 

I’ll be in line right behind him ^^^!!

 

GM's current 2.0T is completely underwhelming. Even the Genesis brand has a better base engine for its sedans and crossovers. This CT5 as tested was over $60,000 and it hits 60 mph about 7 seconds. I'd rather have a stripper V-series with the 3.0T.

It's too bad they weren't willing to put in the investment to get the new 2.5T under the hood, because it makes way more sense for the car.

 

237 hp for a luxury sedan that weights 3,685 lbs (awd) simply is not enough. This is practically the same as a Camry (232 hp). Luxury vehicles cannot have adequate power; they must have an abundance of power. This engine fails to deliver.

 

It wasn't too long ago when GM's 2.0T was the industry standard of power and fuel economy. I don't know if they were simply trying to create more separation from the N/A 3.6L V6 by setting lower power benchmarks during development, but the new 2.0T is also mediocre in fuel economy. Keep in mind, these competitors crush the CT5 in acceleration.

BMW 3 & 5-series (rwd): 28/35 mpg
Audi A4 (awd): 26/36 mpg
Audi A6 (awd): 24/31 mpg
CT5 (rwd): 23/32 mpg
CT5 (awd): 21/30 mpg

 

If you have driven the 2.0 in the CT5, there is nothing wrong with it. With that said, the base engine should be the 2.7

 

If you have driven the 2.0 in the CT5, there is nothing wrong with it.

I've driven multiple LSY equipped CT5s since the model was introduced five years ago. The engine wouldn't be appropriate for a Chevy Malibu, let alone any Cadillac.

 

This thing is about as exciting as a bowl of room temp oatmeal. Pass.

 

Great looking but I don’t know if I’ll ever be ready to cross under to a four cylinder in any vehicle let alone a luxury vehicle. As cp-the-nerd said I built a CT5-V with leather, rwd for $60,600.00.

 

My ATS has a 272 hp 2.0T. I wonder why they detuned it to put in these cars as an additional 35 hp makes a difference. Fuel economy?

 

It's a completely different engine. In the GM press release when it came out I remember them saying something about significantly reduced NVH and like 10% better fuel economy, but most reviews of cars with this engine still tend to complain about the lackluster refinement and noises it makes, in addition to being almost universally panned for the lack of power versus competitors.

 

All the replies are correct about this 2.0T, but my guess is the average CT5 buyer doesn't care, and it goes good enough for them. It's a great car either way.

 

So far the only people in this conversation are people interested in performance. But note that the reviewer liked it, including the engine power. I tend to think the people that don't care about performance will find 237 hp to be sufficient.

With that said, the CT5 isn't lighting up the charts with sales volume. Is it as simple as what the reviewer said? Are people just NOT giving it a chance and going straight to the Germans?

The question is, what do the people that don't care about performance want - more luxury? Is it that 20 or 30 hp? More prestige? As one shoe doesn't fit everyone it's probably a little bit of each. My thought is giving it that extra hp as it won't hurt, take the luxury quotient up a bit and don't reserve all of the improved luxury for the top end models. Then prestige will follow.

 

So far the only people in this conversation are people interested in performance. But note that the reviewer liked it, including the engine power. I tend to think the people that don't care about performance will find 237 hp to be sufficient.

With that said, the CT5 isn't lighting up the charts with sales volume. Is it as simple as what the reviewer said? Are people just NOT giving it a chance and going straight to the Germans?

The question is, what do the people that don't care about performance want - more luxury? Is it that 20 or 30 hp? More prestige? As one shoe doesn't fit everyone it's probably a little bit of each. My thought is giving it that extra hp as it won't hurt, take the luxury quotient up a bit and don't reserve all of the improved luxury for the top end models. Then prestige will follow.

As someone who bought 3 of these so far, I agree, we are focused on performance, or lack thereof in the 2.0t. Yes, we would like more luxury but gm seems to not understand what the word means so, absent performance, there's really mo case for the car.

I bought 2 3.0t and a 2.7 because they provided adequate performance in a great chassis. I look at my purchase as a 4 door "sport" car not a luxury. I like luxury too but gm hasn't had anything to talk about in that realm for years. When I compare ride and interior materials / style against Lincoln or the Jag and Audi products I've owned, it's no comparison. My ct6 had size, tech, style and presence and I LOVED it, but it still wasn't luxurious. It did not coddle the occupant. It did not ooze class and quality like fine furniture in an old money mansion. It bore no resemblance to luxury goods or fine-anything. It was just a great, well engineered and generously sized machine.

I accept the ct4/5 as sporty sedans and put my money down accordingly, but I've yet to see a 2.0t version with enough luxury to redeem itself as a worthy buy or to differentiate it from any number of more pedestrian choices. The camry comparison seems fair. The Genesis is hands-down more appealing and I've actually told my dealer that I wished he would buy a franchise because the lack of a local dealer is the only thing keeping me out of a Korean sedan.

 

Cadillac still has a ways to go to get the performance crowd on board. They simply do not have that reputation yet in the eyes of most buyers. ¯\(ツ)/¯

 

Huh??

 

Many on this forum care about performance, 95% of the population doesn't.

 

but the new 2.0T is also mediocre in fuel economy.

The LSY 2.0T engine is mediocre (worst in class, actually) all around: fuel economy, performance, and refinement all fall short.

This thing is about as exciting as a bowl of room temp oatmeal. Pass.

+1
Pass indeed! There's nothing remotely sporty about the "Sport" Cadillac CT5 variant reviewed in the OP's video, especially since GM dropped the FE3 MRC suspension option on that trim level for Model Year 2025.

Fortunately, GM still offers a CT5 variant under $60k in the U.S. market that's a joy to drive, and just happens to be the one that cp-the-nerd mentioned in post #4: base 2025 CT5-V 3.0L V6 twin turbo RWD with that magical FE3 MRC suspension has an MSRP of $58,390 (which is less than a base 2025 BMW G60 530i):

 

I’ve never seen a Tesla take off even moderately hard, and there’s a million of them in my state alone. Vast majority of drivers like to think they’ll someday push their ‘sport’ model hard, but never do.

 

The “new” 2.0T in the XT4/CT4/CT5 is awful. It sounds terrible, is inefficient, and is gutless. It’s a step back from the “old” 2.0T it replaced in the ATS/CTS.

It has no business being in a Cadillac costing $60,000, no matter what excuses the typical GMI crowd makes for it.

 

One of the reasons for the high price is that Cadillac eliminated the base model. That being said, there is a simple solution. Spend an extra 4K and get the CT5-V. The CT5-V has a msrp of $52, 890 vs $48,890 for the now base Premium Luxury/Sport.

 

there is a simple solution. Spend an extra 4K and get the CT5-V. The CT5-V has a msrp of $52, 890 vs $48,890 for the now base Premium Luxury/Sport.

Excellent solution! Just a heads up, the $52,890 MSRP for CT5-V is for Model Year 2024. Model Year 2025 CT5-V MSRP increases to $58,390, but includes additional standard equipment versus 2024 Model Year.

For comparison, an equivalent 2025 CT5 Sport with 19" Satin Graphite wheels and Brembo brakes (both of which are standard on CT5-V) has an MSRP of $51,590. The extra $6,800 for the CT5-V is absolutely worth it.

 

Exactly. When you buy a luxury car in this class and price range, you aren't paying for a merely adequate engine. You just spend your money elsewhere. I keep pointing to the Koreans because the amount of effort that is going into the Genesis brand makes it look like Cadillac isn't even trying to win over customers in the bread and butter $40-60k range.

And to the people saying it's only a 20-30 horsepower difference from the BMW or whatever, it's not. The German power ratings are essentially what those cars put down at the wheels. Everyone knows this. There's a reason the BMW 530i Xdrive with the "255 hp" 2.0T weighing 4100 lbs runs a low 14 quarter mile.

The “new” 2.0T in the XT4/CT4/CT5 is awful. It sounds terrible, is inefficient, and is gutless. It’s a step back from the “old” 2.0T it replaced in the ATS/CTS.

It has no business being in a Cadillac costing $60,000, no matter what excuses the typical GMI crowd makes for it.

And it therefore makes me really have to wonder about the designers and ?engineers? at gm/Cadillac that think something this raucous really belongs there. Shame on them...

 

Brand new 2025 CT5 2.0T with a 10 speed 0-60: 7.1 seconds.

https://www.motortrend.com/news/2020-cadillac-ct5-20t-pros-and-cons-review/

11 year old 2014 CTS 2.0T with a 6 speed 0-60: 5.9 seconds.

Review: 2014 Cadillac CTS 2.0T (With Video)

It’s been decades since Cadillac produced the “Cadillac” of anything. However, when car buffs dismiss the only American luxury brand left, they fail to see Cadillac’s march forward. 2002 brought the first RWD Cadillac since the Fleetwoood. A year later the XLR roadster hit, followed in 2004 by...

www.thetruthaboutcars.com

That’s embarrassing.

 

It always cheaper and easier to do nothing, so why do you think GM made those negative changes to the 2.0T?

My conspiracy theory is Caddy was going all EV so they saddled the base CT4/5 with the detuned 2.0 so it wouldn't sell as well, making it easier to eliminate. Yet now their all EV mantra is delayed so... what happens next?

I watched it, the reviewer is giving vague seat-of-the-pants impressions. He's basically reviewing it like my wife would. There isn't a shred of actual evidence the engine is underrated, one of the only tests I can find puts the CT5 2.0T AWD at a 7.1 second 0-60. This is about a second slower than my Blazer V6 and the significantly older Malibu V6 I used to own, so it wouldn't impress me whatsoever.

This isn't a $30,000 camry or accord, it's a $60,000 luxury car and there are competitive standards it should reach, even with the base engine. It's 2-4 mpg behind the competition and gets walked in a straight line, that's unacceptable. We didn't have to make any excuses for the old CTS.

But that brings me back to one of my earlier posts in this thread - this car isn't meant for us GMI types, we all want the V or V Blackwing. Several people I know would be perfectly happy with the 2.0T - they might want the sporty look and the satisfaction of having a Cadillac, but that 0-60 time is unimportant. We are all busy trying to make this vehicle something we want, but I am not sold that it is what the average Joe wants.

How else do you review a car? You give your impressions and that is it.

With that said, I do agree that it should be the best in the segment. The engine sound should be nice and it should feel peppy, like my wife's Volvo (with a similarly powered 2.0T - I've not driven the CT5 with the 2.0T.). GM should spend that extra $500 to upgrade those little things to make the CT5 lower trims be better.

The common thing here... "even with the base engine". Yup. Fer cryin' out loud Cadillac, you are after-all CADILLAC... and this SHOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED ACCEPTABLE... even if maybe, the going all EV thing is hanging out there. You don't see the import competition pulling this 💩 .

 

'25 BMW 530 has exactly 18 more horsepower. Dey be pullin' dat , too.

 

I already pointed this out: German luxury engines are all underrated and basically make their stated power at the wheels, this has been widely known for years. The BMW 530 2.0T runs low 14s.

 

^ Are they tested via SAE standards? If so, they're not rated at the rear wheel, and they absolutely experience drivetrain losses like every other vehicle.

What would be interesting to know, is; is it allowable to UNDER rate tested engine output... just as long an an OEM does not OVER rate it... but why would an OEM do that?

BTW- '25 BMW 530i 2.0T is 0-60 in 5.9 secs (for $59K), and a CT-5 2.0T does 0-60 in 6.6 (for $49K). Is anyone actually racing these against each other?? I don't believe the 'holy grail of normal people' are pritorizing 7/10th of a sec to 60 and going with BMW. All those buying either model of 2.0T do. not. care.

 

My guess is the German's underrate their HP to help their customers with insurance.

I'm with you, people buying the lower trims don't care about 0.7 seconds.

It could be as simple as the reviewer said at the end, people just need to give it a chance.

 

Facts (oops!) :

 

But hey, since it’s a gross rainy Sunday over here and the Lions aren’t playing today, **** it, I’ll feed the troll.

The BMW you decided to mention? It hits 0-60 well over a second faster and while doing so gets better fuel economy.

https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a46145807/2024-bmw-530i-xdrive-test/

Hope that helps!

 

Gee.. when discussing “sport sedans” it all of a sudden doesn’t matter how quickly it accelerates??

But anyways, sure. Even if they didn’t care about 0-60, they’d get a more efficient, more comfortable, more prestigious car. Lemme guess… none of that stuff matters either?😂

Shocking I tell ya what you hear on GMI when a clearly superior offering beats the brakes off of a GM car lmao.