[SAngelo]

This car shouldve been introduced maybe not as a CT5V but atleast with the 3.0 liter V6 twin turbo. I'm sick of reading about the mediocre 2.0 turbo. GM this is not how you generate interest in the Cadillac brand !!! You wonder who makes decisions here !!

 

[1958carnut]

Not convinced of that completely.. as 9 out of 10 trolls on the internet would never have bought the car anyway.. 2.0L or 3.6L TT.. Again.. people HERE complained about this engine with FULL KNOWLEDGE that the ATS had not only a 3.6L, but a 3.6LTT. Some got off their asses and bought.. the others... well.. and that goes for any brand

You're probably right about that.

 

[Mr.Buttons]

Not convinced of that completely.. as 9 outta 10 trolls on the internet would have never bought the car anyway.. 2.0L or 3.6L TT.. Again.. people HERE complained about this engine with FULL KNOWLEDGE that the ATS had not only a 3.6L, but a 3.6LTT. Some got off their asses and bought.. the others... well.. and that goes for any brand

For the ones that didn't buy it was probably the wrong shade of brown.

 

[Envoy4Life]

The CT5 is a shockingly poor effort from Cadillac. I know I've been hard on them (come on, deservingly so), but this car is just so bad all around that it took even me by surprise.

Horrendous volume powertrain, GTA 5 level exterior design, mediocre interior, and driving dynamics that aren't as good as the outgoing cars it replaced... why would anyone even look at this car?

 

[protovack]

The CT5 is a shockingly poor effort from Cadillac. I know I've been hard on them (come on, deservingly so), but this car is just so bad all around that it took even me by surprise.

Horrendous volume powertrain, GTA 5 level exterior design, mediocre interior, and driving dynamics that aren't as good as the outgoing cars it replaced... why would anyone even look at this car?

the peanut gallery....lol

horrendous powertrain? How do you know its horrendous? driven one yet?
GTA 5 design? I don't even know what that means.
Driving dynamics worse? Again how do you know? One big media magazine review?

 

[Envoy4Life]

the peanut gallery....lol

horrendous powertrain? How do you know its horrendous? driven one yet?
GTA 5 design? I don't even know what that means.
Driving dynamics worse? Again how do you know? One big media magazine review?

Ya. Drove a nicely equipped Premium Luxury 2.0T a few weeks back. Sounded like a blender, didn't drive as well as my CTS, and didn't feel anywhere near as luxurious inside, either. The 3.0TT might be able to make a few of the lesser glaring issues feel less important, but the fact of the matter is this: Cadillac swung and missed with the CT5, and has introduced a mediocre car into a rapidly shrinking sedan market that doesn't offer anything outside of Super Cruise that the outgoing CTS did, and somehow took a step back in the process.

Issa dud, fam.

 

[protovack]

CTS is a great car no doubt, but the CT5 looks to have a much better user experience, better center stack controls and better infotainment.
I also happen to think the CT5 looks way better than the CTS. I also think its a better size with better packaging, and the re-done V lineup is also better, cheaper and more accessible, with most of the performance. I doubt there is a significant difference in interior quality. The CTS has more of a flowing, curvy interior design. The CT5 is a little crisper, more BMW like. It's all the same materials and you know it. I'm glad you are happy with your CTS and I'm really glad you actually bought one (most in these threads would never even buy a cadillac). But it kinda seems like you are just ragging on the CT5 for no reason. It seems like a great car. I haven't driven one yet so I'll reserve judgement, but I see no reason why it wouldn't "drive as well" as previous cadillacs.

 

[CMiatso DaBang]

The CT5 is a shockingly poor effort from Cadillac. I know I've been hard on them (come on, deservingly so), but this car is just so bad all around that it took even me by surprise.

Horrendous volume powertrain, GTA 5 level exterior design, mediocre interior, and driving dynamics that aren't as good as the outgoing cars it replaced... why would anyone even look at this car?

Here we go...

Owned a Gen 3 CTS that was the epitome of GREAT LOOKING CTS Gen 3s .. and STILL I say the CT5 is a better looking car than my CTS was even without the trimmings. The CT5 is gorgeous.. and U are a person who doesn't even like the Escala Concept.. that would explain your hate of the CT5.. as it is a basically a scaled down version of that concept in almost every way.

Driving dynamics??? Engine??? Yeah.. 2.0L versus the 3.6L or VSport or obviously V.. I came away with the same thought.. But then again.. it still performs in that category as well as several cars smaller than it is.. and even though Cadillac decided to make the lower trims softer.. after some complained about them being hard last go round.. (damned if U do.. damned if U don't.. if U're GM)it still performs.

My take.. DON'T BUY THE 2.0L... it comes in 3.0LTT and 3.0LTT with more juice.. or 6.2LSC.. oh.. and anyone who doesn't think this design is sexy is definitely not a person I'd listen to remotely

 

[CMiatso DaBang]

CTS is a great car no doubt, but the CT5 looks to have a much better user experience, better center stack controls and better infotainment.
I also happen to think the CT5 looks way better than the CTS. I also think its a better size with better packaging, and the re-done V lineup is also better, cheaper and more accessible, with most of the performance. I doubt there is a significant difference in interior quality. The CTS has more of a flowing, curvy interior design. The CT5 is a little crisper, more BMW like. It's all the same materials and you know it. I'm glad you are happy with your CTS and I'm really glad you actually bought one (most in these threads would never even buy a cadillac). But it kinda seems like you are just ragging on the CT5 for no reason. It seems like a great car. I haven't driven one yet so I'll reserve judgement, but I see no reason why it wouldn't "drive as well" as previous cadillacs.

Exactly.. the 2.0L is what he drove.. to his credit.. it is weaker than the previous 2.0L in the CTS because Cadillac needed an engine that got people in the 32MPG club. WHY!!!! Did Cadillac do this again??? Because of fuel economy and the FACT.. that we bitched and complained that we wanted the 3.0LTT in something else. Guess what Caddy did.. they listened.. and anyone who want the more livelier version.. no make that two more livelier versions.. can opt for that 3.0LTT with 400+lb-ft or twist where it handily out matches even the 540i in both iterations by about 70lb-ft... YET!!! We spend gobs of times crying about the bottom engine that NO ENTHUSIAST SHOULD BE TALKING ABOUT IN THE FIRST PLACE

 

[gkr778]

But it kinda seems like you are just ragging on the CT5 for no reason. It seems like a great car. I haven't driven one yet so I'll reserve judgement, but I see no reason why it wouldn't "drive as well" as previous cadillacs.

Envoy4Life actually drove a CT5 350T and compared it to its predecessor. Car and Driver did the same. Both had similar assessments, namely that CT5 350T does not "drive as well" as a comparable third gen CTS.

If you haven't driven either car, why do you doubt the results of those who have?

 

[bballr4567]

Ya. Drove a nicely equipped Premium Luxury 2.0T a few weeks back. Sounded like a blender, didn't drive as well as my CTS, and didn't feel anywhere near as luxurious inside, either. The 3.0TT might be able to make a few of the lesser glaring issues feel less important, but the fact of the matter is this: Cadillac swung and missed with the CT5, and has introduced a mediocre car into a rapidly shrinking sedan market that doesn't offer anything outside of Super Cruise that the outgoing CTS did, and somehow took a step back in the process.

Issa dud, fam.

I mean, we all did wonder how they managed to get so much money off the MSRP. I think these reviews are starting to show where it came from.

 

[ksr]

Went to see some CT5s at the dealership earlier today. They look great in person. Pictures just don't do some cars justice, and this is one of them.

The had a $48K premium luxury model in gray. Not typically a fan of gray, but it works for this car and was a good darker shade of gray.

Three white one that stickered just under $40K. Doesn't cost much more than a lot of midsize cars, but definitely looks more expensive than its stickers. The car has a very premium look to it.

The best was a $49K sport model. Black with black wheels. A very mean looking car. Really nice. This one just stands out. It would be a great alternative to the high-end Chargers from someone looking for tough looking, fast sedan (at least once it gets the TT engine).

It was twilight and this dealership always tints windows, so it was difficult to see the interior well. But what I saw looked pretty impressive. The new screen is really nicely integrated.

 

[protovack]

I find it hilarious that all the major magazines pretty much loved the ATS when it came out, but are now ragging all over the new cadillac sedans. The CT4 and CT5 are basically the same car but modernized. The 2.0 turbo is a better engine than both base engines of yesteryear (the na 2.5 4cyl, and 3.6 V6). The interiors are way better now with the CUE system gone. The 2.7L in the CT4-V and 3.0TT in the CT5-V are going to be awesome drivetrains and offer serious performance, for way cheaper than previous V models, so that people who want something "in the middle" between a standard model and a V-model can have something too. Basically GM is giving us exactly what people asked for, yet all people can do is rag on them. It's ridiculous. If they blinged them up and inflated the price, people would cry they are too expensive. So they pushed the price down and "oh they're cost cutting again". No matter what GM does, people will moan and groan about it.

 

[gkr778]

Basically GM is giving us exactly what people asked for

People asked for a less powerful engine, sloppier body control, and an uninspiring interior design with diminished materials quality? That's what the CT5 provides vis a vis the third generation CTS.

Just curious which people actually asked for those things. I know Envoy4Life and other third generation CTS owners certainly did not.

 

[ksr]

People asked for a less powerful engine, sloppier body control, and an uninspiring interior design with diminished materials quality? That's what the CT5 provides vis a vis the third generation CTS.

Just curious which people actually asked for those things. I know Envoy4Life and other third generation CTS owners certainly did not.

I don't get why the 2.0 is detuned from 272 HP in the old version. Makes no sense.

Haven't actually been in the CT5. But the interior looks rather nice. I think it's a step up, at least in design, from the CTS.

The black Sport model I saw yesterday, with the black wheels, black trim, is easily one of the best looking cars I've seen in a while.

 

[dannyg]

...

Three white one that stickered just under $40K. Doesn't cost much more than a lot of midsize cars, but definitely looks more expensive than its stickers. The car has a very premium look to it.

The best was a $49K sport model. Black with black wheels. A very mean looking car. Really nice. This one just stands out. It would be a great alternative to the high-end Chargers from someone looking for tough looking, fast sedan (at least once it gets the TT engine).
...

Agree. At around $39K MSRP I'd certainly consider a base 2.0T CT5. Maybe even $41K with the sunroof/speakers/wireless package. At around $50K (out of my range) I'd 100% wait for the 3.0TT.

 

[sdotjeezy]

I find it hilarious that all the major magazines pretty much loved the ATS when it came out, but are now ragging all over the new cadillac sedans. The CT4 and CT5 are basically the same car but modernized. The 2.0 turbo is a better engine than both base engines of yesteryear (the na 2.5 4cyl, and 3.6 V6). The interiors are way better now with the CUE system gone. The 2.7L in the CT4-V and 3.0TT in the CT5-V are going to be awesome drivetrains and offer serious performance, for way cheaper than previous V models, so that people who want something "in the middle" between a standard model and a V-model can have something too. Basically GM is giving us exactly what people asked for, yet all people can do is rag on them. It's ridiculous. If they blinged them up and inflated the price, people would cry they are too expensive. So they pushed the price down and "oh they're cost cutting again". No matter what GM does, people will moan and groan about it.

The new 2.0T is down 20 horses and 50ft/lbs...that's probably why the mags are down on it. But lets see what they say about the loaded diaper looking CT4 to see how their opinion on the ATS has changed. The CT5 vs the outgoing CTS, according to the mags...is slower and feels sloppy in comparison to the razor sharp CTS. All GM had to do was improve on the interior of the CTS and bring it up to date in terms of design on both the interior and exterior and they would've been straight.

 

[protovack]

The new 2.0T is down 20 horses and 50ft/lbs...that's probably why the mags are down on it. But lets see what they say about the loaded diaper looking CT4 to see how their opinion on the ATS has changed. The CT5 vs the outgoing CTS, according to the mags...is slower and feels sloppy in comparison to the razor sharp CTS. All GM had to do was improve on the interior of the CTS and bring it up to date in terms of design on both the interior and exterior and they would've been straight.

The new 2.0T is tuned completely differently. Liter for liter, you can tune for different objectives and come out with different behaving engines. One is not worse than the other, and whatever was lost in the new 2.0T, something was gained, probably low end torque but I haven't seen a dyno sheet. And it also doesn't matter, because if you want a twin turbo V6, you can get that. The 2.0T is totally good enough for someone who just wants a solid luxury car to drive on the street, and that type of buyer does not care about peak horsepower and torque, they care about how it drives on the street, and for those people an engine tuned for low end torque feels really good on the street.

0-60 and quarter mile times for CT4 and CT5 are not even known yet, so be careful about saying its slower than a CTS. Also, none of the reviews went into any detail at all about how exactly the CT5 was "sloppier" than the CTS. You know what is probably happening, is cadillac tuned the non-V models to be cushier on the street, and reserved the tight suspension tuning for the sport and V models. Again, the mags got a 2.0T premium luxury model which is aimed at non-enthusiasts who just want a nice cushy sedan to drive to work in.

The interior IS just as good as the CTS. Take a close look, all the materials are exactly the same, it's just rearranged. The CTS has a more flowing, organic look to the design, the CT4 and CT5 have more of a sharp, BMW styled interior. It's the SAME materials just rearranged.

It's easy to jump on the hate bandwagon, but lets try to be objective and think this through. Wait until the V models are out to make a judgement from an enthusiast perspective, and don't hate on the base model for no reason. For many, scoring a nice base model CT4 or CT5 for around 36 grand will be a high point in their life, maybe even the dream car they can afford. Why should I make them feel bad telling them their base model CT5 is junk. That's such a mean thing to do, not to mention inaccurate.

 

[sdotjeezy]

The new 2.0T is tuned completely differently. Liter for liter, you can tune for different objectives and come out with different behaving engines. One is not worse than the other, and whatever was lost in the new 2.0T, something was gained, probably low end torque but I haven't seen a dyno sheet. And it also doesn't matter, because if you want a twin turbo V6, you can get that. The 2.0T is totally good enough for someone who just wants a solid luxury car to drive on the street, and that type of buyer does not care about peak horsepower and torque, they care about how it drives on the street, and for those people an engine tuned for low end torque feels really good on the street.

0-60 and quarter mile times for CT4 and CT5 are not even known yet, so be careful about saying its slower than a CTS. Also, none of the reviews went into any detail at all about how exactly the CT5 was "sloppier" than the CTS. You know what is probably happening, is cadillac tuned the non-V models to be cushier on the street, and reserved the tight suspension tuning for the sport and V models. Again, the mags got a 2.0T premium luxury model which is aimed at non-enthusiasts who just want a nice cushy sedan to drive to work in.

The interior IS just as good as the CTS. Take a close look, all the materials are exactly the same, it's just rearranged. The CTS has a more flowing, organic look to the design, the CT4 and CT5 have more of a sharp, BMW styled interior. It's the SAME materials just rearranged.

It's easy to jump on the hate bandwagon, but lets try to be objective and think this through. Wait until the V models are out to make a judgement from an enthusiast perspective, and don't hate on the base model for no reason. For many, scoring a nice base model CT4 or CT5 for around 36 grand will be a high point in their life, maybe even the dream car they can afford. Why should I make them feel bad telling them their base model CT5 is junk. That's such a mean thing to do, not to mention inaccurate.

uh....the car reviewed by C&D was a 350T Sport, and they did run the 60, about 1s slower than the CTS 2.0...but you're right about one thing, maybe they're saving the stiffer sprung CT5 for the V. Anyway, this shouldn't have been the first variant they made available to the press and public, they should've led off with the 3.0TT, the reviews would've been more favorable and introduced buyers/readers/enthusiast to the CT5 on a more positive note.

 

[ral1960]

People asked for a less powerful engine, sloppier body control, and an uninspiring interior design with diminished materials quality? That's what the CT5 provides vis a vis the third generation CTS.

It isn't aimed at the CTS customer anymore. Unfortunately, they killed the car aimed at the CTS/E class/5 series customer in favor of a future EV (probably).